This thread is for the discussion of the language, culture, travel, daily life, etc. of Japan. Let's tark at randam in Japanese and English. Take it easy!
>I will no longer be working with Means, in the future, you will not be working with [person] you previously worked with. >I'm no longer be working with Is the same thing, but it's broken English.
Noah Ward
Give me the full sentence It's usually used in something like 出来不出来に関わらず, i.e. irregardless of what you could and what you couldn't
Michael Lewis
Oh, I'm sorry. For the second sentence, I meant "I'm no longer working with"
Mason Robinson
Does the first sentence have the nuance of "NEVER again"?
Isaac Smith
Okay then the difference would be >I will no longer be working with Means when the point when you are saying this, or a later specified date, you will no longer be working with someone. So it's a statement of the present or future. >I'm no longer working with Refers to the termination of your business relationship being past tense. So it happened already. It could be either way. Depends on context if they don't specify.
Austin Davis
無効にしろとは言ってないんだよな 後始末をしろと言ってる
James Hall
>it happened already. it's weird... using "be+ ~ing" to talk about a past event... but I guess it's just the way it is.
>it's weird... using "be+ ~ing" to talk about a past event. You don't use being to talk about past event. You use it to say "From this moment onward, I will not be working with user anymore" or "after this project, I will not be working with user anymore"
It sounds a little strange. If you get used to a certain job, there will be fewer things that you cannot do, but not the things that you CAN do.
Camden Carter
not sure i understood it as you meant it... but thanks.
Carson Gomez
You should ask /djt/ or somewhere with native English speakers that can communicate in Japanese. They may be able to explain it better.
Nolan Hall
thank you. I found that line while searching up 出来
Grayson Martin
oh, okay. i'm glad you are not working with some imbecile japanese who can't compose a proper sentece.
Juan Rivera
>ask /djt/ most of them are beginners... probably their japanese isn't good enough to explain this. I try some research with your comment as a guide. thanks.
Julian Cook
Oh besides...About Osaka sacking her coach...is it talked about a lot in the US? Or tennis isn't popular enough?
there is an indication that American English prefers "have" while British English prefers "have got". In addition, there are several references to "have got" being more informal than "have"...there is an indication that American English prefers "have" while British English prefers "have got". In addition, there are several references to "have got" being more informal than "have"
Tennis isn’t mainstream, but it’s popular. Roger Federer is will known, so are Venus and Serena.
Osaka is popular only for tennis fans, and not normal Americans
Jaxson Taylor
there is an indication that American English prefers "have" while British English prefers "have got". In addition, there are several references to "have got" being more informal than "have"
Sebastian Sanchez
>Osaka is popular only for tennis fans What?? She's an American national and she's the next Serena!
Yeah, her popularity among the normal people peaked during Serena’s little tantrum. However, her name is almost unknown by most. I have a tennis channel on my tv, so I know who she is
Thomas Adams
>tennis channel May I ask how much you pay for it? I pay like 2300 yen for a month the satellite service which broadcast grand slams and selected tournaments with major male players in them. I need to pay extra 1000 for an internet tv service specialised in sports. I like tennis but not interested in other sports much...so it seems too much just to watch watch tennis.
Josiah Kelly
My parents pay for it. It comes bundled with 500 other channels. There’s always something new on the tennis channel
Aiden Murphy
>500 other channels With entertainment being so cheap...americans still go to movie theaters. i don't understand.