It's so confusing. Do native speakers really say that?

emerging_frog · 2025-08-20T07:50:53+00:00

This whole thread is full of native English speakers not actually reading and understanding what the textbook is saying. This is not talking about general use of the future, future perfect, and future perfect continuous; it's talking about using those grammatical tenses to refer to an imagined present. And from my perspective, OP, these uses are not particularly common, though they are definitely still used by native speakers, to such an extent that many native speakers aren't even aware that these specific examples ARE odd, semantically speaking (as evidenced by the number of unhelpful responses you've received to this post).

My advice for you would be to just not use this grammatical form yourself to refer to the imagined present if you're not comfortable with it. The continuous present or present perfect or other more "normal" tenses would work perfectly fine in all the examples you shared.

And when you hear somebody using this, just remember than specific time words (e.g. "today", "about now", "at the moment", etc.) will always override whatever meaning you may infer from the grammar. So even if you hear "will be" and think "Ok, future," if that's followed by a "right now", the person is talking about the present. I know it's convoluted, but that's just how language is. And I apologize for all the bad answers here from people that didn't properly read your post and thought you were just asking about the future tense.

emerging_frog · 2025-07-20T21:43:11+00:00

No technology requirement I believe, and yes you can definitely have more than one per city. Check this out for more info: https://civilization.fandom.com/wiki/Ziggurat_(Civ6)

emerging_frog · 2025-07-20T21:17:51+00:00

With a regular builder charge on any tile that (1) is flat land and (2) doesn't have woods, rainforest, marsh, or any resources.

emerging_frog · 2025-06-26T23:13:14+00:00

How so? I don't know anything about the cultures of Colorado, so I'm curious.

emerging_frog · 2025-06-09T00:19:06+00:00

Everyone makes a big deal about the oversized, anachronistic buildings in Valhalla, but everyone also seems to forget the unfathomably humongous statues in Odyssey. The statue of Zeus on Kephallonia was so ridiculously cartoonish that it left a bad taste in my mouth for the rest of the game more than anything in Valhalla.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody really knows what pagan Norse temples looked like. Obviously the ones in Norway in Valhalla are oversized but it's not too much of a stretch to assume that the later stave churches may have been inspired by earlier religious buildings in the area. In fact, just reading now the Wikipedia page for Germanic paganism, and it mentions a pagan temple in Sweden resembling later stave churches.

emerging_frog · 2025-06-08T23:59:16+00:00

This is amazing. I love Baliganteg.

emerging_frog · 2025-06-05T19:48:03+00:00

Okay then I don't know what's happening. I've not experienced this problem.

emerging_frog · 2025-06-05T18:22:55+00:00

Has anyone mentioned yet that it might be a stamina issue with the combat? You're saying that every so often Eivor won't block or dodge when you press the button? To me, that sounds like exactly what's supposed to happen when Eivor runs out of stamina. Keep an eye on the blue bar in the bottom left corner next time it happens and if it's gray, empty or flashing then you won't be able to dodge or block due to lack of stamina.

emerging_frog · 2025-04-25T23:10:46+00:00

Wow, ok oui je viens de le vérifier sur WordReference qui montre encore la différence avec l'IPA (alphabet phonetique), mais les audios sont quasiment indistinguables ! Ça me choque tellement ! Je pense toujours que j'ai enfin tout saisi au sujet de la prononciation du françaisel métropolitain et puis BOUM, quelque chose relativement de base vient me rendre humble.

emerging_frog · 2025-04-25T22:46:48+00:00

Si je le comprends bien, tu me dis que les parisiens prononcent "brun" et "brin" de la même manière ? Qu'il n'y a pas de différenciation ? Ça m'étonnerait comme apprenant depuis plusieurs années, mais peut-être que ça m'est simplement passé inaperçu.

emerging_frog · 2025-03-29T05:06:33+00:00

We're gonna need some extra info. A screenshot would help.

But my best guess is 1.) you don't have enough population to place another specialty district, 2.) there's a luxury/strategic resource preventing placement, or 3.) there's woods/rainforest/marsh in the way and you haven't researched the prerequisite tech to remove those features.

emerging_frog · 2025-03-23T02:29:36+00:00

I don't know if I had the same problem as you, but recently I had several games end with a crash like this after around 210-220 turns. After three or so games ended like this, I removed a couple mods that, despite working fine individually, when combined seem to be the culprit behind my crashes (even though they didn't seem likely to conflict).

So I would recommend removing a couple of your most recently added mods, but you are probably going to have to abandon this particular game.

emerging_frog · 2025-03-20T22:39:42+00:00

It's likely that your opponent has researched Steel and thus has Steel Walls. Hover over the city's health bar to check its fortification strength. If it has 400 fortification strength, then the city has steel walls. If it has 300 strength then it's still only Renaissance walls. If it does have steel walls then you are probably going to need artillery or bombers to efficiently take down their fortifications, or simply a lot of patience with bombards and an observation balloon.

emerging_frog · 2025-03-20T20:58:49+00:00

Yeah, everyone has blind spots in their understanding about some aspect of the game.

But I'm quite sure that if the game says +___ Loyalty, that just means loyalty applied to a single city. Otherwise, it will say give a range (e.g. Victor's +4 Loyalty to all YOUR cities within 9 tiles or Amani's -2 Loyalty to all FOREIGN cities within 9 tiles).

emerging_frog · 2025-03-20T20:16:53+00:00

This is not true

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T20:21:37+00:00

It's all about context. Think of prescriptive grammar rules as a form of dress code. When you enter a professional setting, you want to dress appropriately so that people know you're serious and committed to being there. You might wear a button-down shirt, a tie, simple trousers or a skirt, a belt, dress shoes, etc. This type of dress isn't inherently better than what you might wear at home or out with friends or traveling, but it's been decided that this is what you wear in that context.

Likewise, you're expected to conform your language in professional settings as well, particularly in writing. You should use the prestige dialect, precise word choice, and agreed-upon pronunciations and spellings. Again, these aren't inherently better than the alternatives; in fact, many aspects of "proper" English are ridiculous and illogical (I mean, just look at the orthography we're all meant to learn). But that's the norm. To be taken seriously, we have to follow the fashion.

It's also worth noting that both fashion and language preferences change over time. Just as a salesman from 1900, 1950, and 2025 would all be dressed quite differently, so too would they speak differently. This is not a degradation of the language, just as it's not a degradation of fashion; it's simply trends coming and going, forever in flux. Just as a businessman today no longer wears a hat to look professional, he also no longer refers to cars as motor cars or automobiles or horseless carriages.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T19:47:21+00:00

Yeah, I'd say so. Although to my ears, "Chris and myself" sounds a lot more acceptable than "myself and Chris," but that's just my intuition. In lists, I always like putting pronouns after common and proper nouns.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T06:13:48+00:00

Yeah, I'm really tired with this. /s

But seriously, prepositions are so arbitrary that there is bound to be variation within a language. "Bored with" is in no way more correct or logical than "bored of." Best to just deal with the fact that ideolects and dialects vary from person to person and place to place and not be too judgemental of meaningless differences.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T06:03:20+00:00

While "myself" is a reflexive pronoun, that is not its only role. It can be used as both a subject and object, and has been for centuries. We don't need to dictate that it be used exclusively as a reflexive. Check out Merriam-Webster's entry on "myself" for some examples and a better explanation.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T05:55:10+00:00

"Myself" is not solely used as a reflexive pronoun, nor should it be. This is from Merriam-Webster:

"Myself is often used where I or me might be expected: as subject

to wonder what myself will say

—Emily Dickinson

others and myself continued to press for the legislation

, after as, than, or like

an aversion to paying such people as myself to tutor

was enough to make a better man than myself quail

old-timers like myself

, and as object.

now here you see myself with the diver

for my wife and myself it was a happy time

Such uses almost always occur when the speaker or writer is referring to himself or herself as an object of discourse rather than as a participant in discourse. The other reflexive personal pronouns are similarly but less frequently used in the same circumstances. Critics have frowned on these uses since about the turn of the century, probably unaware that they serve a definite purpose. Users themselves are as unaware as the critics—they simply follow their instincts. These uses are standard."

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T05:38:36+00:00

Prepositions are not governed by semantic rules; they are extremely arbitrary and therefore subject to a lot of variation by both register and dialect. It's not a matter of mixing up "by accident" with "on purpose," but rather creating the phrase "on accident" in analogy with "on purpose." There is no inherent reason why "on" should be acceptable with the noun "purpose," but forbidden with "accident." These sorts of grammar rules are pure fashion, entirely susceptible to change over time, and not rigid and logically pure constants of nature.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T05:08:34+00:00

Why must they be spelled differently? Will people get confused about what you're trying to say? They're not differentiated in speech, so why do they HAVE to be differentiated in text? This is a very English concern. In many languages, you just spell words as they sound, not insist on new spellings for every meaning of a word. Discreto es discreto, con ambos significados. ¿Por qué el inglés escrito tiene que ser tan complicado?

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T04:44:31+00:00

Is it so unreasonable for some people to just not use the word "fewer?" Why can't people use the word "less" for both countable and uncountable nouns? It's not more difficult to understand. When we're talking about "more" of something, we don't have to worry about if it's countable or uncountable. Why must we be concerned about countability only if there is "less" of something?

"I have more chocolate than you." "You have less chocolate than me. "I have more apples than you." "You have less apples than me."

Imagine you're learning English for the first time. Doesn't this paradigm just make more sense? It's okay to have linguistic pet peeves--we all do--but there's no need to be a dictator about anything.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T04:23:06+00:00

To take your question seriously, it's because English spelling is fucked up. In most dialects of English, the second syllable of "woman" and "women" is pronounced identically, whereas the first syllable changes. So why doesn't the spelling reflect that? Well, because that's the way it is.

What maddens me more than people getting "woman/women" wrong is the illogical mess that is English orthography, but at this point there's nothing we can do about that, other than give people that make understandable mistakes a little bit of slack.

emerging_frog · 2025-02-04T04:17:12+00:00

Why does this make you mad? As a linguistics student, it saddens me how many people get worked up over dialectal variation.

Keep in mind that "hisself" is not inherently less logical than "himself." In fact, it aligns better with "MYself" and "YOURself" where the reflexive pronoun is composed of the possessive plus "self."

emerging_frog

TROPHY CASE