Since when has this been the case? Whenever I heard it used this way, I assumed it was a mistake. Are MW being ...overly descriptivist? Then again, some of my online friends from the US did find my have/had drunk odd on occasion.
@userr2684291 I usually don't check Collins anymore. Its definitions are one of the worst. It is the largest single volume dictionary though in terms of number of definitions, and the paper version is updated very frequently.
@userr2684291 I find many of their definitions incomprehensible. If I don't already know the meaning of the word and don't check other dictionaries, sometimes it is very hard to figure out what the definition is saying. Sometimes, it feels as if the person writing the definition is just trying to write it in a hurry to get the job done. But the ODE doesn't give the pronunciation of every headword, and the Chambers has humorous definitions and doesn't use IPA.
@userr2684291 thefreedictionary.com/zen talks so much about the origin of Zen. But it doesn't definitely write out that word. If it writes out the word, I would know easily. I guess Zen is translated from 禪. If it just writes 禪 out, I would know it clearly. I really can't recognize the phonetic translation of Chinese.
because English characters can't exactly present the pronounciation of Chinese characters.
if Zen really means 禪, I feel it boring. When I was in university, some clubs invited me to 禪, I turned them down.
Eh, I guess I see what you mean, but I think only the first word can be a little difficult because it's not clear which definition of patronize they're talking about. But dictionaries sin in that way often.
@CaptainBohemian Looks like it was taken from Japanese (which probably took it from Chinese). See this.
I'm _____ to this neighbourhood.
Because the sentence has been constructed for you, you should be able to see that it describes your relationship to the neighbourhood, not the other way around.
The option "strange" is not correct because "strange" in the context of being somewhere new means...
WRONG. WRONG. WROOOONG! :/
We need an answer there that combines the first and second answer
Leaves out the wrong parts of the first and adds its emphasis of what option the examiner had in mind.
@M.A.R.ಠ_ಠ The comment under the top-voted answer says it all, so everything's gucci.
And you have to realize they probably mentioned the pattern be new to something somewhere and that knowledge is what the test is trying to elicit.
Be new to some environment, rather, I suppose.
Anonymous
@CaptainBohemian Well, that's actually not true. Pinyin works great. They aren't English characters, but Latin letters. The only thing is that it's a bit underspecified, so we can add tone marking: chán
Anonymous
10:10 PM
Any language can be transcribed just fine with Latin letters. That doesn't mean it's necessarily easy to read or understand, because reading is highly overlearned; we read a language quickly the way it's normally written, and if you write it differently it's hard to read because we haven't practiced it that way. But we can definitely make phonemic transcriptions for any language with Latin letters.
Anonymous
I know I have a much harder time reading Japanese when it's romanized (transcribed in Latin letters), and that's because it's not normally written that way. But if it were always written that way, and I got all my practice reading it like that, it wouldn't be so hard.
Anonymous
You could say you lose some of the beauty, or the ability to do things in writing that you can't do in speech (like visual puns), and that's not necessarily wrong. I'm not saying we should write languages in Latin script, just that we can.
But I mean... hm. Are there really any other prevalent methods other than pinyin for writing Chinese (characters) using a standard keyboard, for example?
So I think most people already know pinyin nowadays, so it wouldn't be that big of a deal if everything began to shift towards that.
Anonymous
Oh, they all learn pinyin in school anyway.
Anonymous
But I think bopomofo might be used for input in Taiwan. I'm not really familiar enough to say how prevalent it is.
Anonymous
I think enough people use it that it could be counted as "prevalent". Just don't quote me on that :-)
Interesting. They could switch to that instead. Chinese would still look arcane, but if anyone wanted to learn the writing they wouldn't have to spend a lot of time on the characters.
Eh, I don't think their government's reading this, though.
(:
Anonymous
What? Governments don't base their policy on discussions in Language Overflow? We might have to rethink our whole approach.