<< is that a joke or an exaggeration >>
There are more options.
There are more options.
You Cannot Learn English Without Making Mistakes
"I suspect you're British, as well, by the way that you have changed the past simple to the perfect."
You think that past simple is appropriate for an ongoing process?
"<< They think that mistakes are inevitable, while learning English. >>
They think mistakes are inevitable, while learning English."
Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? The object of "think" is not "mistakes", so not including "that" is incorrect (or, at least, informal). The comma, however, is incorrect.
You think that past simple is appropriate for an ongoing process?
"<< They think that mistakes are inevitable, while learning English. >>
They think mistakes are inevitable, while learning English."
Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? The object of "think" is not "mistakes", so not including "that" is incorrect (or, at least, informal). The comma, however, is incorrect.
<< Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? The object of "think" is not "mistakes", so not including "that" is incorrect (or, at least, informal). The comma, however, is incorrect. >>
Humpty Dumpty and Alice.
Humpty Dumpty and Alice.
<< Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? >>
What is "it"?
What is "it"?
<< They think that mistakes are inevitable, while learning English.
They think mistakes are inevitable, while learning English."
Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? The object of "think" is not "mistakes", so not including "that" is incorrect (or, at least, informal). The comma, however, is incorrect. >>
"The comma, however, is incorrect."
A sweeping statement.
They think mistakes are inevitable, while learning English."
Are you saying that it is incorrect to include the word "that"? The object of "think" is not "mistakes", so not including "that" is incorrect (or, at least, informal). The comma, however, is incorrect. >>
"The comma, however, is incorrect."
A sweeping statement.
I've had a look here http://www.antimoon.com/norsk/reports/end01.htm and found this:
"Siden for over to maaneder har jeg ikke gjort noe med norsk"
This is incorrect, though perfectly understandable. "Jeg har ikke lært norsk på to måneder." or "Jeg har ikke gjort noe med norsk de to siste månedene." could be used.
"min intrykk" should be "mitt inntrykk".
The correction is correct Norwegian, but it sounds stilted. It looks like the person who corrected has tried to keep it as close as possible to the original text.
I wouldn't have bothered posting this except for this quote:
"I am learning another foreign language, to see if I can learn without making mistakes. I want to show people that this is possible."
"Siden for over to maaneder har jeg ikke gjort noe med norsk"
This is incorrect, though perfectly understandable. "Jeg har ikke lært norsk på to måneder." or "Jeg har ikke gjort noe med norsk de to siste månedene." could be used.
"min intrykk" should be "mitt inntrykk".
The correction is correct Norwegian, but it sounds stilted. It looks like the person who corrected has tried to keep it as close as possible to the original text.
I wouldn't have bothered posting this except for this quote:
"I am learning another foreign language, to see if I can learn without making mistakes. I want to show people that this is possible."
As people have said the original text is mainly fine. There are some small refinements that could be made, but the only clear error is "provoked them to write" instead of "provoked them into writing". All the other so-called errors are acceptable even from native speakers, although occasionally stylistically infelicitous.
"The comma, however, is incorrect."
There has been a curious failure to justify this.
There has been a curious failure to justify this.
Folks, remember that Michal was trying to write the article in simple English so that even beginners could understand it. Of course he could have written it in a more native-like, better-flowing way, but that would have discouraged many readers.
Folks, remember that Michal wrote the article in everyday English so that readers here could readily digest it. Of course, he could have written it in a more formal academic way, but that would not have further aided our antimoon readers.