Does this sound natural?
“The weather is so hot. Let’s take a swim.”

Question

Megansimmer12 · Accepted Answer

Yes, however, I’d phrase it as “let’s go for a swim”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn it’s not unnatural. It’s totally acceptable. I just don’t hear “take a swim” as often as I hear “go for a swim”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn still works. But I don’t hear it said that way often

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn would

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “would” sounds the most natural for all in my opinion. But 1 and 5 Could be “could.” But I still think “would” sounds the most natural for all of them

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn can would work for #1 and #5

Megansimmer12 · Answer

I think #5 might actually be “can” now that I think about it.
And #1 is probably “could”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn #2 could be “could” but “would” is more natural

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, that sounds natural to me

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I still think it would be “would.”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn that’s a tough one. The sentence itself isn’t all that natural. I’m assuming these sentences are from a book?

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn 
#1 can be changed to “I was surprised you thought the test was easy” or “I’m surprised you thought the test was easy.” 
Was vs Is - were you surprised when you first heard that the other person thought the test was easy or are you surprised now?

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn now that I know you wrote these, I can help correct them better.
1. “I don’t believe that would happen.” Or “I don’t think that will happen”
2. “I don’t see why that would be a question.” Or “I don’t see why you would ask that.
3. “I was surprised you thought the test was easy” or “I’m surprised you thought the test was easy”
4. “I wish he would come back” or “I want him to come back”
5. “Native speakers can’t say unnatural sentences”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, depending on the situation. In reply to something like “what if I break my leg?” “I don’t believe that will happen” is a good reply

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “I didn’t believe that would happen!”
Don’t is present tense and didn’t is past tense

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “I didn’t think that would happen” or “I didn’t know that would happen” would sound better. Or “I can’t believe that happened”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn absolutely!

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “I don’t believe that happened” means that you don’t think it actually happened. Like someone is lying about something happening.
“I don’t believe that would happen” would be better written as “I don’t believe that will happen”
And “I can’t believe that would happen” should be written as “I can’t believe that happened”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn it wouldn’t sound natural. I’d say “I don’t believe that happened” and “I can’t believe that happened”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “Was”
“Were” is plural in this context.
It would be “were” if the sentence was “I assumed you would think the exams were hard”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, i was just saying that “were” is the past tense of “was” in that specific example

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no, it would be “was”
It would be “were” if it was EXAMS

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no, that would likely be said as “if the exam is hard, I might fail”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “were” is correct in this sentence

However, a lot of Americans don’t know that. Many Americans would say “was.” But “were” is actually correct, so use “were”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes. I believe it’s because “he” is a pronoun and “exam” is a noun

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no real difference. “You said” is more natural. “You would say” is wordy and redundant. However, a person might say “I would say the test was easy” and you could answer “I’m surprised you thought the test was easy”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn not personally, but it’s completely acceptable

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no. should wouldn’t work

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn Are you curious now, or were you curious in the past?

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn this one is a tough question.

There are many natural ways to say this sentence.
#1 works
#2 also works.
You can also say “I’m curious as to why you would say that”/“I’m curious as to why you’d say that”

#3 also works 
#4 also works.
You can also say “I was curious as to why you would say that”/“I was curious as to why you’d say that”

Or you could simply ask “why did you say that?” Or “why would you say that?”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, that’s correct. You’re basically asking for clarification or an explanation as to why they said something

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, it does work. It’s a casual way to say it

Megansimmer12 · Answer

It could be if you added a comma. Like “I’m curious, why would you say that?”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I’m actually Canadian. “as to why” is more formal. “About” is probably more common

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn #2 sounds more natural

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn It sounds fine to me. A little formal, but fine nonetheless

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I’d probably just say “Canadian English is similar to American English” unless asked why they are similar

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn both work. “the dazzling, starry sky” means that the sky is both dazzling and starry.
“The dazzlingly starry sky” means that the stars in the sky are dazzling. 
I’d personally use “the dazzling, starry sky” even though the sky is likely dazzling from the stars.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “We sleep under the dazzling stars” sounds better unless you change “out” to “outside”

Or you could say “we sleep under the dazzling stars outside”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I prefer #1

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, both work

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I think “outdoors” would sound better at the end. But “out there” sounds better after “we sleep”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I think it’s more of a saying in this sentence. It’s vague. It could mean “be careful out there in the world,” or “be careful doing *something*” but it basically just means “be careful.”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn depends on the context. But it’s probably a bit weird to just say that to a friend unless they’re doing something dangerous.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn  #1. Sounds more natural. But I’d say: “people like all of the movies he stars in”
Or you could say: “people like all of the movies he has starred in”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no real difference. Both mean “people like all of the movies he is in.”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, that does work quite well. But you can still say “stars in.” It’s a bit confusing, I know. The reason you can still say it in present tense even though the actor is dead is because he is still “the star” of the movie.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn maybe not directly. But you could say “people like all of the movies he starred in before he died” if you really want the reader to know he’s dead

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn you could also say something like “although he is no longer with us, people still love all of the movies he starred in”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I personally don’t think “died” is impolite, but it doesn’t sound as nice as “passed away” or “is no longer with us”

Die/died/dead are definitely more blunt as you stated earlier

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, that sounds fine to me. Not impolite at all

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I don’t see a problem with it. But if you want to sugar-coat it, you could say “his grandma passed away yesterday.”

I would probably say “passed away” if I was talking to a child because “died” might sound too scary for a young kid

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn 
Nice ways to say someone died:
• No longer with us/no longer here
•gone to a better place/is in a better place
•at peace now
•took their last breath
•lost their life

Not nice ways to say someone died:
•kicked the bucket
•bit the dust
•croaked

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn maybe not “lost their life.” But the other ones would be fine to say to a child

Megansimmer12 · Answer

No, “with” sounds better. If you said “on” I’d probably think you meant “on top of him” before I realised you meant you spent time on him. But “on” is acceptable, I just have a bit of a dirty mind and I’m sure a lot of other people do too.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn You can! “I spent the whole day on him” means that you dedicated the whole day to him. “I spent the whole day with him” means that you stayed with him all day. The only reason I suggested using “with” instead of “on” is because some people may read it as “on” as in “on top.”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn no. Not unless you are saying you had your homework with you but you weren’t doing it

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “on.” If you’re spending time, it’s on. Kind of like spending money. You spend money ON something and you spend time ON something. 
Basically, that example is interchangeable with “don’t dedicate your time to me. I promise you won’t get anything from me”
“On me” doesn’t sound dirty here because it’s more like commonly used.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn you can say that if you mean that the person shouldn’t physically be with you. Like if they want to spend the day with you. “You shouldn’t spend your time on me” is more ambiguous. You could mean that they shouldn’t spend all that time texting you/flirting with you/talking to you/hanging out with you. With is if they are physically with you.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn do you mean “we don’t say punctuation marks out loud”?

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “We only need to worry about punctuation marks when you are writing.” Might be a good way to say that.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

i think both can be used interchangeably. I’d probably go with “wouldn’t be”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yep. “Aren’t” is a contraction of “are not”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn for this example, I’d say “they aren’t” 
But if you were to put emphasis on the “not” then I’d say “they’re”.
Ex. “I can’t think of an example where they’re NOT interchangeable.” That would more likely be used if someone said “I don’t think those words can be used interchangeably” and you can only think about examples where they can’t be used interchangeably

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I still think “I can’t think of any situation where they wouldn’t be interchangeable” sounds better because it sounds more like you’re thinking about it. You could also say “I can only think of examples where they are interchangeable”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn you can just say “can I have my change in bills” or “can I have a ten-dollar bill instead of coins?”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, that also works

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn I think “situation” would be better. Because you can say “I can’t think of a situation where they wouldn’t be interchangeable” but you can’t say “I can’t think of a situations where they wouldn’t be interchangeable”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

#1. Is correct.
#1 can mean that it’s illegible/unreadable.

#2 sounds like he put his homework in a mess like a pile of dirty laundry or something.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn they mean the same thing, but “heap” is usually used when you want to emphasise that it is a BIG pile or untidy pile of something

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn heap is also often said dramatically. Like “that’s one big heaping pile of horse****”

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, pile is more common where I’m from

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn “I don’t see where you’re coming from” and “I see where you’re coming from” are both sayings/expressions. They don’t sound natural when you alter them because they don’t directly translate to what they mean. 
Both “I don’t see where you’re from” and “I don’t see where you come from” seem like a lower-level English speaker is trying to say that they don’t know where the other person is from (as in the continent/country/state/province they were born in or grew up in)

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn yes, or you can say “I can’t see where you’re coming from” or “I can see where you’re coming from” also work.

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn a lower level English learner. But a young native speaker might also say something like that.

I’m going to go to sleep now. I can help some more when I wake up

Megansimmer12 · Answer

@branduhn thank you! I’m happy to help

Does this sound natural?“The weather is so hot. Let’s take a swim.” See a translation

Yes, however, I’d phrase it as “let’s go for a swim”

Yes, however, I’d phrase it as “let’s go for a swim”

@branduhn it’s not unnatural. It’s totally acceptable. I just don’t hear “take a swim” as often as I hear “go for a swim”

@branduhn still works. But I don’t hear it said that way often

@branduhn would

@branduhn “would” sounds the most natural for all in my opinion. But 1 and 5 Could be “could.” But I still think “would” sounds the most natural for all of them

@branduhn yes, pile is more common where I’m from

@branduhn yes, or you can say “I can’t see where you’re coming from” or “I can see where you’re coming from” also work.

@branduhn a lower level English learner. But a young native speaker might also say something like that.I’m going to go to sleep now. I can help some more when I wake up

@branduhn thank you! I’m happy to help

Does this sound natural?
“The weather is so hot. Let’s take a swim.”

@branduhn a lower level English learner. But a young native speaker might also say something like that.

I’m going to go to sleep now. I can help some more when I wake up