|
Post by BertL on Nov 27, 2010 21:39:33 GMT -4
I wouldn't put any verb after "before 2014". If the stadium isn't built yet, then I would say "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014." If the stadium has been finished already, then I would say "Brazil has built its stadium before 2014."
If you really want to include a tense after "before 2014", then I would say "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014 will have come" or "Brazil will have built its stadium before 2014 will be over." Or, if the stadium has been finished already, "Brazil has built its stadium before 2014 has come."
I'm not a native speaker myself, so I am not 100% sure on the last sentences, but you should be fine using the first constructions (without anything after "before 2014").
(By the way gillianren, what are the rules on using punctuation together with quotation marks, for example when ending a sentence? I myself prefer to put my full stops or commas outside of quotation marks, but I've seen the other form used a lot in my study books.)
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 17, 2010 13:25:22 GMT -4
That's because Chang'E 2 is faked too. ;D
Just kidding.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 10, 2010 12:00:15 GMT -4
Seems to work from the Netherlands. Good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 7, 2010 21:06:49 GMT -4
It's not plagiaristic if you're typing out yourself the text you're copying. ;D
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 7, 2010 19:38:46 GMT -4
Good luck with the matters you need to attend to.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 6, 2010 15:06:17 GMT -4
I'd love to use diacritics more often, but the combination of Google Chrome with Windows Vista means it can't be done for some reason. They work fine in word processor programs, though. They're used extensively in French and German; not that I regularly type in either language, but I had to learn both in high school. In the English and Dutch languages diatribes seem to be pretty passé; they mostly find their way into the language through loan words. I'm just fine with that. (Hey, you can't blame me for trying to cash in with a diacritic joke! )
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 5, 2010 18:11:53 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Nov 3, 2010 15:43:37 GMT -4
It's really difficult to discuss with people who have hard anchored conceptions. It is, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 30, 2010 6:24:15 GMT -4
I can't shake the conviction that this is a stunt. The footage has been doctored using CGI to add the figure specifically to use as a vehicle to get this chap's company in the public eye. He starts off by introducing himself and his company and the work it does, and is posing in front of a poster advertising a film. Does anyone have access to an older copy of that Chaplin film and can have a look? Here is (apparently) a clip of the original premiere footage. Mind you, it was uploaded 3 days afer the original Time Traveller video (which I haven't watched myself), so it might be in on the conspiracy.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 29, 2010 11:29:48 GMT -4
Talking about Excel: Bob B., is there any chance you could upload or share the Excel files themselves? I'm quite interested in seeing how you format and use the numbers and equations to come to the wonderful diagrams you post on this website.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 29, 2010 0:35:51 GMT -4
What makes you think she's talking into whatever she's holding in her hand? What makes you think she is holding something in her hand?
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 28, 2010 15:57:21 GMT -4
If you want my two cents . . . . If both were past events, "He wanted to talk when she arrived" or "he wanted to talk after she arrived" are both perfectly acceptable events. If he didn't do it, you could try "he had wanted to talk after she arrived." It's if she didn't get there that you'd want "he wanted to talk when she would have arrived." Gillianren, your two cents probably are worth more than anybody else's around here.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 28, 2010 10:41:52 GMT -4
You could use the 'future in the past' construction - "would arrive". You can read more about this verb tense on this page (which incidentally also uses "would arrive" as an example). This results in: "He wanted to talk when she would arrive." It still sounds a bit awkward to me, but it seems to be the best fitting tense. Perhaps you could use "after" instead of "when", so that you get something like this. "He wanted to talk to her after she would have arrived."
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 26, 2010 18:14:23 GMT -4
Yes, I am. How did you guess? Yes, I could certainly recognize the style too. Gentlemen, we have our work cut out for us. Let's not be negative. Inquisitivemind is posting his theories on here now as opposed to just YouTube; in my opinion that's a step forward by any standard.
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Oct 23, 2010 3:44:37 GMT -4
I'm also not sure how "no water on the Moon" relates to this thread.
|
|