Two men robbed his house last night.

Well, not actually, Setanta. Vocabulary can certainly be used differently in different registers of a language. Tico was mistaken in trying to suggest that how an action is described in the field of law determines how it's used in speech.

Of course, such a notion is preposterous but I'm afraid that this type of pedantry still abounds when it comes to language.

Idioms show those who think this isn't a strict enough use to be wrong. In what sense can a man who dies be said to "kick the bucket"? In what sense can a person who says, "he kills me" expect to die, repeatedly? In what sense should we expect a person who is "burned out" not to resemble a burned out house?

I was thinking if I'll get cold feet if I walk a mile in your shoes...

An idea too far to the irrealis side of the scale; the use of the historical present, 'will' and the lack of past tense form on 'walk make it sound unnatural, Francis.

I was wondering [thinking] if I would get cold feet if I walked a mile in your shoes...

I was thinking - would I get cold feet if I walked a mile in your shoes...

I agree with that, absolutely.
My first post on this thread covers that. Most people would not notice, or mind, this usage.

But the questioner asked a specific question, and it was our duty to answer it carefully and as exactly as possible.

Nothing that I didn't know, I should have been more careful in my writing..

But was more interested in the underlying concept (the semiology) of these two idioms...

Exactly doesn't mean misleading based on some pedantic notions of correctness. It's not a problem to give EFLs accurate information. In the legal sense, the definition is ... but the everyday sense is much more common.

English does this all the time. As I mentioned, all manner of building open and close seemingly all on their own. The vast majority of English speakers are smart enough to realize just what is going on. Leaving EFLs with some half baked notion of how a word ought to be used serves them not at all.

You'll have to be more clear, Francis.



A good example of the dangers of grammar translation or the interference of the mother tongue.