![]() ![]() This was the next milestone in human history. It was further aiding as a gateway to easier communication and enhanced capabilities. The technology was seen by many around the world as a major breakthrough that could cure blindness, deafness, disease, and a huge boost in performance for modern-day life. The controversy was covered up and very little was known about how it was done. They succeeded and became a phenomenon, later becoming a mandatory law to have them implanted at birth using state of the art surgery and cutting edge technology.ĬyberCon was granted this permission from the government. CyberCon's project involved the development of neuro-hub chips. Their schemes had been controversial to most before, but their newest idea seemed almost too perfect.Ī much sinister secret was about to be exposed. BrainBread 2 introduces a zombie fps mixed with RPG / Arcade elements, the game is very action-packed and generally fast-paced.ĬyberCon, the notorious global corporation, aspired to deliver to the world something that would change the fate of humanity. Grab a weapon, demolish your enemies, level up, become more powerful, let the gore flow, let the limbs fly. Then again, I'd recommend you rephrase the sentence to: "I'll bring you a cup of tea", as you mentioned.An unknown outbreak, a world in chaos, few have survived, and you'll have to stay strong for the dead is walking.īased on the big hit mod BrainBread for Half-Life 1 come's it's spiritual successor that will offer the old BrainBread feeling along with more neat features to immerse you in an epic apocalyptic world swarmed with zombies. Final word: using 'for' is certainly more natural than using 'to' though 'to' is correct I wouldn't recommend using it instead of 'for'. When you talk about bringing a cup of tea, the cup of tea is a gift and is thus brought for them. However, when you bring something, you bring it for them, because it is considered a gift in this context. This is simply because you give something to a person. You should notice here that the second one is definitely not natural to say. ![]() Let's try replacing bring with give:ĭon't get up – I'll give a cup of tea to you.ĭon't get up – I'll give a cup of tea for you. The difference between the 'for' and the 'to' here is (as far as I'm aware) the verb. And more pleasant, for the blessed receiver of said cup of tea. yes, both of them can be rephrased into this form, and this is more common and natural. To answer the statement that isn't a statement so much as a question in a mask in this context due to its first phrase being 'I think'. ![]() But in practice any such distinction normally means little, in context. And most likely if they do decide on a possible distinction, it'll probably be that bringing a cup of tea to you emphasises to your location, whereas for emphasises for your benefit. In general, native speakers will (usually, subconsciously) recognise that OP's alternatives aren't the most "natural" phrasing, so they might look for a "reason". By contrast, for works with all these verbs (and many, many more). If we recast the above into "monotransitive" constructions ("I'll bring/fetch/make a cup of tea for/to you"), we find that to works perfectly well in #1, and "just about" works in #2, but it doesn't work at all with #3. The first and most important thing to note is that both OP's alternatives are far less likely than the "ditransitive" forms.ġ: "Don't get up – I'll bring you a cup of tea"Ģ: "Don't get up – I'll fetch you a cup of tea"ģ: "Don't get up – I'll make you a cup of tea" Comment to the question probably slightly overemphasises one possible distinction, but it's not completely wrong. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |