21:13
-1
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1071e/1071efecc3b54c01f582bbc2e8bce30718746c97" alt="English Language & Usage"
I searched each of these "you lack of idea", "you lack idea", "you are lack of idea" & they all come out some results so there must be someone is using them.
But, I do not know which expression is correct!
or are they all correct?
0
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/305e1/305e1257b4e1cd64f2671eefd31419fe5efd6e2c" alt="English Language Learners"
I searched each of these "you lack of idea", "you lack idea", "you are lack of idea" & they all come out some results.
SO I do not know which expression is correct?
or are they all correct?
The one on ELL got closed, understandably.
Please do not cross-post on different SE sites; it annoys the administration. I have flagged this for deletion, since the
version on ELU has answers. —
StoneyB 4 hours ago
Because the one on ELU got an answer first.
Which is too bad. I really think it belongs to ELL.
What was done was done, but, meh, the two sites can be very similar.
Oh, it reminds me of another thing: getting rep points on ELU is easier, just because there are more active users there.
@DamkerngT. I feel you are right, I modified my answer, I feel I confused "
It is probable" as "
it is likely" with "
there is a chance or probability for it" —
Ahmad 2 days ago
Reading that again makes me think...
it sounds a bit like, I never trust your comments
or at best, I never think your comments are right until I can't disprove them?
Note to self: What is a 'commenting hazard'?
It's when you post a comment as a gesture of goodwill, and soon are requested for more and more information until your interlocutor is satisfied.
The interaction is quite natural. (I guess I've been on both sides.) It's just that it could be exhausting, sometimes.
You certainly
can say "This is a caution time". We just don't. We use "a time for" or "a time to" when we urge people to take a specific action or adopt a specific attitude in a particular situation.
Play time,
work time,
Christmas time are times set aside for different activities. That's the way we use
time, and I'm afraid you just have to learn these uses one by one: there's no "rule", or even a useful "rule of thumb". —
StoneyB 31 mins ago
I'm afraid not. It would be huge: several times the size of a reasonably comprehensive dictionary. You could get a rough idea by Googling, and seeing how many actual hits you get (NOT that meaningless number Google posts at the top) and who wrote them. —
StoneyB 25 mins ago
That's actually a very interesting point.
We could do that, but practically we wouldn't do that.
I think it's because it's inefficient.
Not only for the makers, but also the learners too.
Dictionaries for learners lay down almost far too many senses of each word already.
In this case, it would be sufficient, or at least the dictionaries would be a very good starting point, for a learner to grasp the senses of a word, such as time
Then, as StoneyB suggested, the learner should observe the real usage in the wild.
Which would require lots of reading or listening. Basically, enough interaction or immersion.
Then again, sometimes the two strategies above still aren't quite adequate. That's where idiom dictionaries come in.
Idiom dictionaries and such document what could be said "surprises".
And that should be about it. That should be enough for learning vocabulary and word usage in any language.
Given that a language has good enough resources, it shouldn't be too difficult to learn.