"ever" for 曾经?

Many Chinese say "ever" when they mean to say 曾经 (ceng2jing1). But that word can be translated as 曾经 only when it's in a question, e.g. "Have you ever been to Shanghai?", or in a negative sentence where it changes to "never", e.g. "I've never said that". Otherwise, it means "always", e.g. "Finding the cure for cancer seems to be an ever-lasting process without an end."

If you really want to say 曾经, say "once" instead, e.g. "Once I had a car accident."

Learn English from native speakers

No doubt there's great benefit in learning English by talking with a native speaker. But most people don't realize that talking to native speakers may not be the fastest way to study English for everybody. Here's some discussion posted to a language study forum six months ago.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't completely agree with you on "当然是和母语英语的老外或外教学口语效果最好". It's not true in all cases. My friend is the president (or school master) of 若亚语言学校 (www.eduroyal.com). She told me many of the students in her school started to change their preference a few years ago from preferring foreign teachers to Chinese teachers, because they slowly realized that in Chinese teachers' classes, they actually improve their English faster.

(I have no connection with that school. I mention it only because the president was my school mate.)

> interesting point, is that a general case, or specific to that school only?

I don't have statistics. But I believe it's a general case in most language schools in China. It should not be a rule that applies to English study in general. Suppose you do have a long-term close relationship with somebody fluent in English and that person is e.g. your spouse (so he or she is infinitely patient!!), then almost definitely it's better if he or she is a native speaker.

Judy, creator of 若亚语言学校:

关于跟老外练习口语

好议题！
我接触过不少学生，为练习口语花费不少精力，效果却不尽相同。关于是否需要和母语的老外练口语，我个人觉得不能绝对。如果有大把时间，而且又遇到文化和教 育程度都不错的母语老外，那么，恭喜你！不过，真实的语言环境中，比如雅思考试、BEC考试或者对外贸易的交流等，经常会遇到不同口音的英语，让听者一头 雾水。所以，我建议练习口语还可以考虑多听不同的录音，然后跟着相对专业的人士练习－－－无论他是否是母语的老外．经常的情况是：如果一个非母语的人员说 一口漂亮的英语，他／她一定有独到的体验，这种陪练者会更加的可遇而不可求．

"Last January" vs "January last year"

> He arrived in New York last January.其中的last January
> 书上解释为今年一月，而不是去年一月~困惑~
> 如果按这样翻译那last该怎么分辨是今年还是去年？

"Last" is a commonly confused word. Technically, it means "immediately past" (see dict.org, where an example is "last Thursday"), "most recent; next before the present" (see dictionary.com, where an example is "last Friday"). So if today is Friday, "last Thursday" as the "immediately past" or "most recent" Thursday would technically be yesterday. Similarly, if it's any month after January now, "last January" would be January this year.

But as Gary B. Larson in his Style Manual points out,

The word last can also be confusing to mean "most recent" when using the name of a month or day; does last April mean April this year or April last year? Preferred: It happened in April. It happened Wednesday. Or: It happened last week. It happened last month. Redundant: It happened last Wednesday

I think Mr. Larson has a good point (although I don't have the feeling of redundancy in the last sentence).Use "last" only when it's not ambiguous; e.g., if it's February now, "last May" means May last year. But say "last Month" or "in January" to refer to the January of this year, and "in January last year" to refer to that in the last year.

[Update 2024-09] We just did a very small test by asking 7 American English native speakers. Suppose today is Friday, six say "last Wednesday" means "Wednesday last week" and one says it means "the past Wednesday" (i.e. two days ago). (That one person lives in New York and is a young man. By the way, he's also the only person that says "next Wednesday" means "the coming Wednesday" if today is Monday.) In fact, the six people's response matches my personal impression, even though I always try to be specific in speaking and writing. In spite of the small sample size, it's safe to say there's a discrepancy between what most people mean by these phrases and what some dictionaries say most people mean. Nevertheless, it's always a good idea to avoid ambiguity.

"no more than" vs "not more than"

> Any difference in meaning between these two sentences?
>
> "His victory in the final was no more convincing than I had expected."
> "His victory in the final was not more convincing than I had expected."
>
> Note that the two sentences below do have difference:
> You are not more careful than he is. 你不如他仔细。
> You are no more careful than he is. 你和他一样不仔细。

That makes perfect sense. But that distinction doesn't seem to apply to the case here: "His victory in the final was (no|not) more convincing than I had expected." I'm not sure, but if I have to think of an explanation, maybe it's because the part after "than" is not a direct object. Consider:

"His victory in the final was (no|not) more convincing than hers."

In this case, "no more convincing" implies his and hers are equally unconvincing, while "not more convincing" says her victory is more convincing.

"idea" not to be pronounced like "idea-r"

> yuzhoucn said:
>
> 不少中国人滥用美音的儿音，如China、India、puma、idea这
> 种字里根本就没有r，也去给它附加一个儿音，听起来就很怪。

I can't agree more on that! We should make as many Chinese studying English now as possible aware of this very common and yet easy to correct mistake.

By the way, a former coworker of mine who grew up in Germany always said "data" as if it was dater. But I don't recall he read "idea" as "idea-r".

"Later" and "recently" are used in past tense

> What will I be a decade later?

Normally, "later" is used in a past tense sentence. Here you can say "in a decade", "in ten years", "ten years down the road", or "ten years from now on".

Similarly, "recently" is only used in past tense (see "最近" is not always "recently"). In the future tense, you can say "in the near future" or "before long".

Off-topic: Year end charity - Half the Sky

Over the past few years I've been searching for the perfect charity. Except for the times when there're natural disasters in China, I regularly donate to American Red Cross. But a message passing among Chinese immigrants a few months ago alerted me to the Red Cross executive director's half a million dollar pay (search on charitynavigator.org), which appalls me. So my search continues.

In the last year or two, I came to know an organization named Half the Sky (www.halfthesky.org). The more I watched it, the more I like it. The executive, apparently an American, spends her time and energy focusing on one thing, helping Chinese orphans in mainland China. They take abandoned kids, strive to provide a loving care environment and turn them into happy, confident and productive members of the society. For young kids, every effort is made to find them a permenant loving home. For older kids, Half the Sky provides them education opportunities, so they can become self-supported adults. Compared to monthly $35 per African child a Houston church sponsors, Half the Sky with its efficiency needs $25 for a Chinese orphan. We have choosy friends that donate to them and we become their donors as well.

I don't work for Half the Sky and the organizers don't know me. But I'd like to promote awareness of this California-registered charity. I regularly receive their newsletters, which are always centered around the kids. Their work during the Sichuan earthquake deeply touched me. The latest news from them asks for donation, as usual, but unlike in other years, they're experiencing particular difficulty due to slowdown of the US and global economy, and many people's unemployment. I encourage those that still have a job and can lend a helping hand to the Chinese orphans to consider supporting Half the Sky, even just for this Christmas.

P.S. I don't know if anybody ever wrote this, but I want to tell you that charity donation of complete willingness, I do mean absolute willingness free of any pressure, is benefitial to our health. The feeling of being content when you do that is pure and religious. You do a good deed, and you're rewarded accordingly.

No concatenation of sentences with comma

> 1. There are 50 stars on America's national flag, each ______ a state.
> A. standing for
> B stands for
> C represented
> D to represent
>
> In my opinion the answer of the question should be B

A is correct. Too many people (especially Chinese learning English) write two sentences separated by a comma. In English grammar, that's incorrect. If needed, the comma can be changed to semicolon so the second sentence further explains the first one.

关于背单词是背英文解释还是背中文解释？

> 由于现在一些“适合中国人的英英词典”面世，
> 我本人也使用了多年，觉得是比英汉词典查
> 得更多单词，但是在记忆词汇的释义时不知
> 道该记 中文释义还是英文释义？如果记英文
> 释义，觉得效率似乎不高，如果记中文释义
>，又怕不能“英语思维”，真是骑虎难下

Question: When you as a Chinese student learn a new English word, should you memorize its English or Chinese definition? The English definition suffers from low efficiency and the Chinese definition obstructs thinking in English.

Answer: How about memorizing its English synonym? Let's say the word is "cranky". You remember its meaning as "unhappy". Since "unhappy" is a very easy word, using that for its meaning won't be harder than using the Chinese translation.

English translation: US Financial Crisis

Partial translation of an excellent article published on a Taiwanese forum

http://yong321.freeshell.org/misc/US_financial_crisis.html