English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room

tchrist

5:02 PM

Fear and loathing lead you to the hot tub?

Or the sweat room and the ice plunge?

Both are curious.

SrJoven

Relevant? shirt.woot.com

tchrist

The jingoism is getting to me.

It’s embarrassing.

Ugly American (pejorative)

Ugly American is a pejorative term used to refer to perceptions of loud, arrogant, demeaning, thoughtless, ignorant, and ethnocentric behavior of American citizens mainly abroad, but also at home. Although the term is usually associated with or applied to travelers and tourists, it also applies to U.S. corporate businesses in the international arena. == Application == === Sports === The term has also been widely used in the international sporting arena. At the 33rd Ryder Cup held in September 1999, the United States zealously celebrated after Justin Leonard holed a 45-foot putt on the 17th green...

Mateon1

Hello. I want to ask a question.
My teacher always says I misuse the word 'fun'. Is it really incorrect to say 'this was a fun movie' or 'that movie was fun'?

tchrist

Get a new teacher.

Mateon1

She says I should use "funny" instead, but that doesn't feel right.

I don't want to say that that movie was hilarious, I want to say that I enjoyed the movie a lot.

tchrist

5:11 PM

You are correct.

Your teach is mistaken.

infinitesimal

what grade?

Mateon1

Alright. I'll need to talk a bit with her tomorrow. :)

tchrist

This is an old chestnut.

Mateon1

infinitesimal: I'm foreign, it's the extended class in the third grade of middle school.

infinitesimal

"funny" is more idiomatic

tchrist

5:13 PM

This is one of those things that old prescriptivists like to have hissy-cows over.

Funny means something else.

infinitesimal

a funny, sad, or romantic movie

tchrist

In "This was a fun movie", fun is an adjective meaning enjoyable, not one meaning amusing.

The people who object to this pretend that fun “is” a noun that cannot be used as an adjunct to another noun, let alone as a gradable adjective.

They are, of course, delusional.

Actual use confirms this.

4

Q: Is "it is a fun game" correct?

"It is a lot of fun," sounds correct, but not, "it is a fun game." Isn't fun a noun? Then why is it used as an adjective? I have heard this usage even by literary giants, so this cannot be a common mistake. Should "funny" be used in stead? EDIT Moral of the story: Fun has become an adjective col...

infinitesimal

@Mateon1 when you say this was a "fun movie to watch" it doesn't mean that the movie was "funny"

tchrist

0

Q: what part of speech is "fun" in the sentence below

"Hiking is fun" Hiking = Gerund is = Verb fun = ? Is it an adverb or noun?

grammar

15

Q: Is "funnest" a word?

We seem to be stuck at an impasse on this issue. Is funnest a word or not? If so, does it mean "most fun"?

meaning grammaticality adjectives superlative is-it-a-word

infinitesimal

It is best to discuss with your teacher what meaning you are intending to convey @Mateon1

Mateon1

5:20 PM

Yeah. I was lowered a point on the example English test that we're supposed to have at the end of middle school because of this.

tchrist

2

Q: fun - part of speech

Compared to other languages, English is in practice pretty indifferent with regards to parts of speech. The lines are often blurry. I'm curious about the following phrase: It's fun. Usually, I'd think that "fun" is a noun. For instance I can have lots of it. However, there are phrasings wh...

part-of-speech

@Mateon1 You are not being tested on how well you know English. You are being tested on how well you can guess what answer your teacher wants you to answer.

As always.

Johan Larsson

@tchrist The endless screams ore not as loud in steam.

tchrist

2

Q: Difference between "fun" and "interesting"

In Japanese, there is no difference in definition between fun and interesting in their adjective forms. I know that fun also has a noun and verb form in English, but I am wondering is there any difference between "fun" (adjective definition) and "interesting"? In all honesty, they appear to mean...

meaning differences

A movie that you have fun seeing is a fun movie. A movie that you laugh a lot at is a funny movie.

Then again, movies that make no sense are also funny movies.

But those ones are seldom any fun.

Games can be fun. Games can be no fun at all.

A fun game is better than an unfun game.

I hope this has been clarifying.

infinitesimal

unfun?

tchrist

whips out his native-speaker licence

infinitesimal

5:28 PM

-_-

tchrist

> un-, prefix 1, expressing negation, representing OE. un-, = OFris. un-, on-, oen- (WFris. ûn-, on-, EFris. ûn-, NFris. ün-), MDu. (and Du.) on-, OS. (MLG., LG.), OHG. (MLG., G.), and Goth. un-, ON. ú-, ó- (Icel. ó-, Sw. o-, Norw. and Da. u-), corresponding to OIr. in-, an-, L. in- (im-, il-, ir-, i-), Gr. ἁν-, ἁ-, Arm. an-, Skr. an-, a-, Indo-Eur. *ṋ, an ablaut-variant of ne not: see ne adv.

> The prefix has been very extensively employed in English, as in the other Germanic languages, and is now the one which can be used with the greatest freedom in new formations.

Why do you hate freedom? :)

> un-, prefix1, expressing negation, representing OE. un-, = OFris. un-, on-, oen- (WFris. ûn-, on-, EFris. ûn-, NFris. ün-), MDu. (and Du.) on-, OS. (MLG., LG.), OHG. (MLG., G.), and Goth. un-, ON. ú-, ó- (Icel. ó-, Sw. o-, Norw. and Da. u-), corresponding to OIr. in-, an-, L. in- (im-, il-, ir-, i-), Gr. ἁν-, ἁ-, Arm. an-, Skr. an-, a-, Indo-Eur. *ṋ, an ablaut-variant of ne not: see ne adv. The prefix has been very extensively employed in English, as in the other Germanic languages, and is now the one which can be used with the greatest freedom in new formations.

Let me know when you finish. :)

infinitesimal

The essence of mathematics lies entirely in its freedom.

tchrist

More lies.

Everyone is into lying.

infinitesimal

the truth hurts

tchrist

@infinitesimal Y por eso se inventaron las mentiras.

Well, either that or because the fruit was tasty.

infinitesimal

5:34 PM

the ends justify the means?

tchrist

Oh, are we back to kerning?

infinitesimal

no

and

yes

:D

tchrist

Aggressive kerning is one means of justifying the ends, but hardly the best or only one.

infinitesimal

I'm not being aggressive :(

tchrist

Of course not: aggressive is the second-person form of that word.

The first-person form is assertive.

infinitesimal

5:38 PM

skullpatrol was aggressive

tchrist

No, third-person is asshole.

infinitesimal

:O

Stack Exchange

Limerick Machine: There once was a man in a room Trying to escape his doom He was filled with doubt On how to get...

posted on February 01, 2015 by sgdi

There once was a man in a room Trying to escape his doom He was filled with doubt On how to get out Not doing so would kill him soon

tchrist

scansion scansion scansion

1

A: a word that would mean "a marriage where either of the spouse is of a higher rank or caste"

Also consider the term mesalliance, “a marriage with a person of inferior social position” (1,2,3). From etymonline.com: mesalliance (n.) “marriage with a person of lower social position,” 1782, from French mésalliance, from pejorative prefix mes- (from Latin mis-; see mis-) + alliance ...

infinitesimal

nice timing on the limerick machine

this^ says alot about human nature

Hanaa

5:53 PM

Hi everyone!

crl

Hi Hn

Hanaa

@tchrist is a good topic

How r u crl?

crl

Gd

vvy

Hi guys

Anyone active?

infinitesimal

askaway

vvy

6:04 PM

hi @infinitesimal

Hanaa

Hi

infinitesimal

hi

vvy

I've written this " Now when I look upon that moment when I was explaining..."

is that grammatically OK?

My grammar is terrible like the grammer

infinitesimal

I would say: "But now when I look back upon that moment when I was explaining..."

vvy

I also wish to ask you guys if it is alright to ask this kind of questions in english.stack

infinitesimal

6:07 PM

sure

or ELL

vvy

@infinitesimal thats a help

thanks

infinitesimal

thanks for asking :-)

vvy

what is ELL?

infinitesimal

English Language Learners.SE

vvy

WOW. I wasn't aware of its existence. Thanks again.

infinitesimal

6:10 PM

English Language Learners

A room to talk about English, linguistics, or anything you wan...

tchrist

6:36 PM

Clickable graphseses:

1

A: What is the difference, if any, between "nunca" and "jamás"?

¡Nunca Jamás! In many instances there is little to no difference between them, but sometimes there can be. In their entry on the historical origin of jamás, this Chilean website on Etymologies succinctly summarizes the principal difference this way: Jamás substitue, enfáticamente, a nunca. ...

I wrote it all in English, or mostly, since @Robusto asked in English. However, you should expect answers en puro castellano from native speakers.

The un-English language sites often have stuff just in the other language. And their tags allows for diacritics.

I can’t believe the chileno wrote Por si alguno quisiere relacionar...

Must be a lawyer. :)

Well, or a scholar.

It may also be a typo.

But I think it intentional. It’s like finding "lest thou perish".

It’s future subjunctive!

"In case someone might like..."

Full table here.

That doesn’t include voseo forms, but I can’t get the DNS to sort out for DRAE. Their DNS has been broken for a week now.

tchrist

6:59 PM

@Rob You asked about this:

9

Q: Difference Between "Computadora" and "Ordenador"

Español Ví un cartel fuera de una tienda que decía: "Computadoras y ordenadores" en un cuadro "cubano" fuera de New York City, En un principio, creo que ambas palabras significan "computer". Pero, ¿hay alguna sutil diferencia entre las dos, por ejemplo, que una se refiera a mainframes y la otra...

selección-de-palabras diferencias-regionales definiciones sinónimos

And no, there is no difference between them. I have no idea what the Cuban sign meant in New York.

Maybe he wanted to get both the people who say one and those who say the other. :)

Mitch

7:11 PM

(removed)

tchrist

Enough to know better than to include a laugh track.

0

A: Express Emphasis without using Italics or Underline

Using italics just to hammer something across is like a joke that comes with its own laugh track: a sign of weakness. A writer skilled in the craft expresses emphasis through variation in vocabulary, phrasing, structure, and length. This is the best way. Those of lesser skill ROUTINELY TURN T...

Mitch

Sometimes a laugh track makes things better

tchrist

jaja

jajajajajajajajajaja

Mitch

MASH had one

infinitesimal

more laughable?

tchrist

7:13 PM

Risibly.

Laughabler

@tchrist Gracias

Gracible

gracibler

Hi

8:06 PM

My goodness, Google Scholar is a bazillion times faster than Google Normal!

tchrist

8:24 PM

I am so loving that papers on Spanish philology aren’t behind paywalls the way English ones are!

Well, those published in Spanish at least.

Cerberus

9:55 PM

The problem of capitalism. The tragedy of the commons.

user116848

Hi!

Cerberus

Greetings.

user116848

@Cerberus Very true.

Cerberus

It was a grave mistake to allow information to be monopolised, even by its authors.

user116848

Everyone tries to make profits in that system.

user116848

9:58 PM

A balance between Capitalism and Socialism is a good thing I reckon.

tchrist

Those words do not mean the same thing to everyone.

To some, socialism is no different from tyrannical, soul-crushing communism at its worst. Please do not forget this.

For such people, there is no social context nor contract involved.

user116848

I agree.

tchrist

Paying social-security taxes is (virtually) mandatory wherever they apply, howsoever frothing a capitalist you proclaim yourself.

What is this?

0

A: Neither do I / Nor do I / Me neither / Me either

Darlin' I've been standin' here just watchin' you all night And I think I've even caught you watchin' me a couple times If I don't ask I'll never know This may sound dumb, but here we go Do you believe in love at first sight Me neither I'm glad that we agree Believe me That's a big relief Well, ...

Johan Larsson

@tchrist that is just wrong though.

Marx wrote nothing about a state.

tchrist

@JohanLarsson Words mean what people say they mean.

Johan Larsson

10:08 PM

fair enough

US invested plenty of $ to ~educate~ people that communism is evil during the cold war.

@Farooq That is also the worst.

tchrist

You have to understand that socialist is as much of a slur to a knee-jerk Republican as Satanist or atheist would be. It’s fighting words.

Johan Larsson

Regulations and corporations leads to the worst bs.

tchrist

Those are different things.

Johan Larsson

what are?

very relevant

tchrist

Governmental regulations and commercial enterprises.

Cerberus

10:12 PM

@Farooq Indeed, it is. Sometimes mistakes are made, in either direction.

@tchrist Well, who are those people? Socialism means what it means; they can consult Wikipaedia?

user116848

@Cerberus Yeah, it is a complicated topic. I know :-)

user116848

@JohanLarsson Hej!

Cerberus

Quite.

Johan Larsson

hej killen

Cerberus

@tchrist It is not right to say that words do not have an intersubjective meaning.

Johan Larsson

10:14 PM

@tchrist Ideally they should be separate.

Cerberus

Hé!

What is killen?

In Dutch, it is an English load word meaning "to kill".

tchrist

*loan

@Cerberus Wikipedia is edited by socialists. :)

Johan Larsson

@Cerberus killen mean man|boy in a friendly way when used like that. Slangy.

Cerberus

All the better that those in the know edit it, nay?

@JohanLarsson Ahh.

tchrist

Sigh.

Cerberus

10:16 PM

Funny.

tchrist

You don’t understand.

Cerberus

What is the root meaning?

tchrist

These are fighting words.

Cerberus

@tchrist I understand it quite well. Socius = ally.

tchrist

Do you understand what that means?

Clearly you fail.

Cerberus

10:17 PM

I know what "fighting words" means.

But it means nothing to me in this context.

Johan Larsson

I never heard the expression fighting word before now.

I think of the open source community as the closest thing to communism.

Cerberus

You could say so.

Johan Larsson

everybody owns the means of production

Cerberus

Except that open source is not about material possessions.

Johan Larsson

can qualify as means as production I think

Cerberus

10:21 PM

And communism is mostly occupied with material means of production.

Sure, it can.

tchrist

> Over the last few years the word "socialism" has become fairly prominent in our American political discourse. It's become fashionable among many Republicans, both elected officials and members of the public, to accuse President Obama, prominent Democrats, or the Democratic Party itself, of being card-carrying socialists of some kind or another.

Cerberus

Well, we weren't talking about local aberrations.

tchrist

It’s like saying someone drinks the blood of newborns.

It means that they are evil.

Same as liberal.

It has nothing to do with freedom.

Cerberus

Liberalism means what it means.

tchrist

It has to do with SAAAAAAATTTTTTAAAAAAAANNNNNN!

Cerberus

10:23 PM

It's not my fault if silly people twist its sense.

tchrist

You would not only not be elected, you would be lynched and hung on a burning cross.

Cerberus

In fact, I will not even consider it.

Johan Larsson

True liberalism and communism are really close to each other I think.

Cerberus

Mm I'm not sure I would say that.

Perhaps Rousseau would.

tchrist

These have become empty terms that are fully equated with wicked, evil, wrong.

Johan Larsson

10:24 PM

+1

they both share that

Cerberus

@tchrist Only among those people.

I do not know or care about them.

Johan Larsson

maybe empty is wrong. Empty in an explosive way.

tchrist

You should.

Cerberus

I do not.

tchrist

Because they make decisions that affect you.

Cerberus

10:25 PM

I have seen enough fools abuse the language in my time.

tchrist

When the idiot-half of America rabble-rouses its drones, they win at the elections.

Cerberus

They don't affect me enough to care about how they abuse words.

tchrist

And they do that by libelling their opponents as evil Satan-spawn.

Cerberus

It is also a tendency of bipartisanism.

tchrist

By calling them horrible words like liberal and socialist.

Cerberus

10:27 PM

To vilify the other party.

Johan Larsson

In Sweden there is very little ideology. The parties are like companies trying to maximise. The result is a skitnödig stack in the middle.

Cerberus

Skitnödig?

@JohanLarsson The same thing happens in all democracies, but there will always be some extremists to stir things up a bit.

@tchrist I wonder how they feel about having to negotiate with a country governed by a party far to the left of the official Socialist Party.

Suriza.

Johan Larsson

@Cerberus anxious in a derogatory way. Skitnödig also means that you need to poo.

hard to translate

Cerberus

Ahh.

Nodig meaning needing.

Johan Larsson

informal

yep

Cerberus

10:29 PM

That's Dutch.

Johan Larsson

nöden har ingen lag

Cerberus

Except without the umlaut.

tchrist

@Cerberus Those are the Enemy, and they are trying to take over this country with evil propaganda.

Socialism means pogroms, Siberia, and baby-killing in China.

That's how they motivate their base, how they get elected.

By appealing to unreason.

It’s fairly hopeless.

Johan Larsson

only fairly?

Sep 29 '13 at 2:55, by tchrist

There is no hope.

Cerberus

@tchrist Well, they're still in NATO etc...

tchrist

10:34 PM

The way to get elected is to make people frightened and angry.

Johan Larsson

When I'm optimistic I think things will change if the debate moves to the internet.

TV is a really poor medium. Just rethorics and bs

tchrist

Unlike the net.

Johan Larsson

I still think the net could be better. Voting mechanisms etc.

But I'm not optimistic about it very often.

tchrist

I don’t know how to get out of the Postman scenario we find ourselves living.

Johan Larsson

what is the postman scenario?

tchrist

10:39 PM

Aug 1 '13 at 16:42, by tchrist

> In 1984, Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us. This book is about the possibility that Huxley, not Orwell, was right.” ― Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business

Johan Larsson

Is it a good book?

tchrist

Yes.

Amusing Ourselves to Death

Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985) is a book by educator Neil Postman. The book's origins lay in a talk Postman gave to the Frankfurt Book Fair in 1984. He was participating in a panel on George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four and the contemporary world. In the introduction to his book, Postman said that the contemporary world was better reflected by Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, whose public was oppressed by their addiction to amusement, than by Orwell's work, where they were oppressed by state control. It has been translated into eight languages and...

Johan Larsson

Starring it for next time I'm buying books.

Does not happen often nowdays. I'm watching video tutorials with eyes closed.

tchrist

For certain values of watch.

Johan Larsson

I should read Brave New World also. Been meaning to do it.

tchrist

10:43 PM

-1

Q: Who are the people from the government that torture terrorists to get lifesaving information?

Are there a specific people with a special profession that do this and if so how do you call these people? Or are the people from the army of CIA doing this? I'm not talking about people who love to torture but the people that torture terrorist for the sake of mankind.

government

“The army of CIA”?

In any event, the answer is criminals.

“For the sake of mankind”.

Johan Larsson

208 pages is a perfect book. Can be read in a night.

tchrist

Agree.

@JohanLarsson Here is the entire book.

> And, in any case, I should be very surprised if the story I
have to tell is anywhere near the whole truth. We are all, as
Huxley says someplace, Great Abbreviators, meaning that none
of us has the wit to know the whole truth, the time to tell it if
we believed we did, or an audience so gullible as to accept it.
But you will find an argument here that presumes a clearer
grasp of the matter than many that have come before. Its value,
such as it is, resides in the directness of its perspective, which

He invoked Plato.

Hah!

Johan Larsson

maybe it is too advanced englisk for me

tchrist

That, I cannot say.

Johan Larsson

Is it a pirate link?

Cerberus

10:53 PM

@JohanLarsson Hmm I don't know.

tchrist

Check chapter 4 on page 44.

Cerberus

@tchrist That is not impressive, but his language is clear and complete, which is admirable.

> Postman said that the contemporary world was better reflected by Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, whose public was oppressed by their addiction to amusement, than by Orwell's work, where they were oppressed by state control.

We are now moving a bit more towards Orwell, too.

Johan Larsson

One problem with the world today is that journalism has shifted from selling journalism to consumers to selling clicks to advertisers.

tchrist

@Cerberus That’s why it is virtually inaccessible to most people these days.

Cerberus

@JohanLarsson Indeed, advertising is a problem in itself.

tchrist

10:57 PM

> As to the conscience of
the audience, or even its judgment, it is difficult to say very
much. But as to its understanding, a great deal can be assumed.
For one thing, its attention span would obviously have been
extraordinary by current standards. Is there any audience of
Americans today who could endure seven hours of talk? or
five? or three? Especially without pictures of any kind? Second,
these audiences must have had an equally extraordinary capacity
to comprehend lengthy and complex sentences aurally.

That no longer exists.

Cerberus

@tchrist How do you mean? It is crystal clear, but perhaps his periods are a bit too...periodic.

Johan Larsson

Not sure newspapars nor TV will be a thing in ten years though.

@tchrist I'm on page 1

tchrist

I mean that nobody can pay attention long enough to read things critically any longer. They cannot handle long sentences or complex ones, let alone thoughts.

Cerberus

@JohanLarsson Television as such will disappear. But the programmes will still be there, on the Internet.

@tchrist Sure they can. It's just that the majority cannot, but they never could.

Most people have always been stupid. One problem is that they no longer know their place. Which, in some respects, has been beneficial, but in others not.

tchrist

> In the second debate, at Freeport, Illinois, Lincoln rose to answer
Douglas in the following words:

It will readily occur to you that I cannot, in half an hour, notice all
the things that so able a man as Judge Douglas can say in an hour
and a half; and I hope, therefore, if there be anything that he has
said upon which you would like to hear something from me, but
which I omit to comment upon, you will bear in mind that it
would be expecting an impossibility for me to cover his whole
ground.4

@Cerberus No, that’s Postman’s point: they used to be able to think, and both process and produce complex sentences and thoughts.

Now only sound-bite sloganeering happens.

Not thought.

Not discourse.

Cerberus

11:01 PM

I don't believe that at all.

The masses have always been unwashed.

tchrist

The masses used to be able to read.

Cerberus

They just used to shut up.

tchrist

In some voting districts, adult functional illiteracy exceeds 20%.

Now what?

All you have to do is sloganeer them and you tip the election.

Cerberus

And was it not always like that?

tchrist

NO!!! That’s his point!

It was NOT like that.

Cerberus

11:02 PM

I do not believe it.

tchrist

Literacy rates in 19th-century America greatly exceed those of today.

Cerberus

That is not what I have heard.

tchrist

Skim chapter 4. I’ll wait.

Johan Larsson

is there an imdb for books?

tchrist

@Cerberus Or just read the first and last paragraphs.

One apiece.

@JohanLarsson I don’t know what that means.

Johan Larsson

11:07 PM

You know what imdb is right?

tchrist

Kinda sorta. Not really. Some crowdsourced thingy.

Why don’t you tell me what sort of properties you are looking for?

Johan Larsson

I like {Coetzee, Camus, Torny Lindgren, Hunter Thompson}

not sure they share much and I did not come up with many.

Don't read much now though.

tchrist

> Early Americans were uncommonly interested in the power of the printed word, and therefore in literacy. ... They showed that American literacy (by 1800) was high by European standards.

@JohanLarsson So IMDB is a place you can type in a list of movies you like and it will tell you others you should like?

> Of all European countries perhaps only Scotland surpassed America in literacy by 1800. Not only had the European literacy revolution been transplanted to the American periphery during the colonial period, but colonial literacy had somehow leaped past that of northwestern Europe.

Johan Larsson

I just check the top 250 list and sometimes the rating of a movie before watching.

But I never watch movies either.

crl

me neither :)

I like Camilla Lackberg as author, thinking of you as she's Swede

tchrist

11:15 PM

> As Thomas Jefferson recognized two centuries ago, a democracy is healthy not only where “the press is free,” but where a literate public is able to make that freedom meaningful.

And this is precisely the problem that Postman is talking about: we no longer have a functioning democracy because we no longer have people who can read and think.

Or rather, who are predisposed towards doing so.

@JohanLarsson There are sites like Goodreads, I suppose.

Johan Larsson

I guess I can just ask you when I need a book. Have a feeling we have similar taste.

tchrist

Heh.

> Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.

Cerberus

You cannot easily compare statistics of literacy then and now.

tchrist

But you can compare attention spans.

Cerberus

Literacy is a fluid concept.

Johan Larsson

11:20 PM

@tchrist what does heh mean in context?

Cerberus

I don't know; can you?

tchrist

Postman gives plenty of demonstrations.

Cerberus

@JohanLarsson Laughter, "that is somewhat funny".

I am listening to the Winterreise.

With Spanish subtitles.

Sometimes they actually help me.

Although my Spanish is infinitely inferior to my German.

tchrist

Fascinating!

You should give freer rein to your Spanish and stop letting your German beat him up so often. :)

Cerberus

Well, it's not so fascinating.

When I'm not sure I heard a certain word right, or when I have no idea what it means, there is a good chance that the Spanish might help me fill in the gap.

For example, I heard something like "Matten". I wasn't sure whether it meant "mats".

Then the Spanish had "campos", so yes.

Text is so much easier to comprehend than speech, even at the same speed.

Well, only under certain circumstances.

English Language Learners

Transcript for

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…