Any native English speakers who want to learn Spanish?

[Bruno Valdeolmillos]

Hello good morning, if you want I can give you my zoom or skype so that we can learn together. My English level is basic. I am a native Spanish speaker. Thanks

[Campbell Ritchie]

Please supply more information, including your location, and whether you are offering this tuition free of charge. Do different countries have different dialects of Spanish? I know English varies greatly like that.

[Bruno Valdeolmillos]

Campbell Ritchie wrote:Please supply more information, including your location, and whether you are offering this tuition free of charge. Do different countries have different dialects of Spanish? I know English varies greatly like that.

Thanks you for replying. I am from Argentina. Yes, of course every place has its particular way of speaking, but obviously I would not speak with idiomatic turns of phrase, but with a Spanish as neutral as possible.
I can understand any Spaniard, Chilean, etc. Just like you can understand an Englishman, or a New Zealander, etc.

[Campbell Ritchie]

Bruno Valdeolmillos wrote:. . . you can understand an Englishman, or a New Zealander, etc.

I have known Englishmen who can't understand a good Glaswegian accent, nor the way they talk in the North‑East of England

[Tim Holloway]

Campbell Ritchie wrote:Please supply more information, including your location, and whether you are offering this tuition free of charge. Do different countries have different dialects of Spanish? I know English varies greatly like that.

Yes, in fact. Even the Spanish words for "computer" and "file" vary with country. Don't even start with Mexican slang. Literal (España) - Castilian - Spanish has a lisp and a few pronouns not used in the Americas. Interestingly, I've heard Panamanian webcasts that seemed to lisp, but never Mexican, Cuban or South American.

And in none of them can you credibly pronounce "Latinx".

[Paul Clapham]

It's true that native Spanish speakers around the world can pretty much understand each other. I've tried to speak Spanish (at gringo tourist level only) in various Spanish-speaking countries mostly in the Americas, and it's only in Argentina that I find myself adjusting my pronunciation to match the locals.

[Tim Holloway]

Linguists like to argue about what constitutes a "dialect". Where to draw the line. Some Arabic Dialects are almost mutually unintelligible from each other, much less "Standard" Arabic. American and British English are very much mutually intelligible. At least until you get things like "Oi! Sunshine! Get your bloody stupid crisp-arctic off the pavement, wanker!"

And then there's Scots English which is considered to be close to unintelligible by non-Scots. Or some of the back-country dialects affected in Monty Python skits and the like. Such as the literal Queen's English; she has tried to moderate that, as people were starting to make jokes that she could have declared war with France durung the Christmas speech without anyone being able to tell what she'd said.

English and Spanish, though came over from basically single sources from the Old World to the New and haven't had time to build up as much in the way of regional mutations. In the case of words like "computer", it was more of a choice among popular syntheses from existing words in the language.

Spain does have a Royal Academy to formally define the language, but I'm not sure if Latin America is listening to them.

[Campbell Ritchie]

Tim Holloway wrote:. . . American and British English are very much mutually intelligible.

Really? What happens if we have American visitors and I offer them faggots to eat? Or a rubber to correct mistakes with a pencil?

. . . Scots English . . . close to unintelligible by non-Scots. . . .

My brother in law once had to ask me to translate Taggart from Glaswegian to English for him. He didn't find it, “close to,” but totally unintelligible. I one stopped at a pub in a little village ten miles east of Taunton and couldn't understand the local accent.

[Tim Holloway]

Campbell Ritchie wrote:

Tim Holloway wrote:. . . American and British English are very much mutually intelligible.

Really? What happens if we have American visitors and I offer them faggots to eat? Or a rubber to correct mistakes with a pencil?

. . . Scots English . . . close to unintelligible by non-Scots. . . .

My brother in law once had to ask me to translate Taggart from Glaswegian to English for him. He didn't find it, “close to,” but totally unintelligible. I one stopped at a pub in a little village ten miles east of Taunton and couldn't understand the local accent.

I did say "very much", not "completely". The sample phrase I gave is a case in point. Without a proper education, no American is going to know that a "crisp-artic" is a semi-trailer vehicle with "Walker's" printed on the side (especially, since they're "Lay's" in the US ). Or that the "pavement" is the "sidewalk", not the paved road. On the other hand, I think "wanker" is beginning to get popular in the USA now. "Bloody" is recognized, but not generally accepted, and the American constabulary doesn't say "sunshine", they fire 37 warning shots through the back of your head.

[Campbell Ritchie]

Tim Holloway wrote:. . . Or that the "pavement" is the "sidewalk" . . . the American constabulary doesn't say "sunshine", they fire 37 warning shots through the back of your head.

Which of those two differences do you think is more dangerous? How do you get 37 shots out of a six‑shooter?

[Tim Holloway]

That's not how American Law Enforcement works.

First, I don't think modern police pistols are limited to 6 shots, even before they started getting issued military surplus. Not a gun expert, but I think you can get at least 9 out of a Glock. The only traces of the Old West in modern law enforcement is in their heads. And in the actual Old West, they had a lot more gun control than most people think.

Secondly, lawmen are prone to descend in 3 or more squad cars, each of which may contain 2 officers. So you may be seeing half a dozen cops on the scene, perhaps more.

Now all we need is a suspect. Maybe someone of a darker complexion jogging in a hoodie holding a threatening winkie wrapper. Or a crazy homeless person. So all these brave officers are put in instant fear for their lives, and they all let loose at once.

I wish that this was an exaggeration, but it's not uncommon, so reports go, for a single US incident to unleash more bullets than the combined discharges of the polizei of the Federal Republic of Germany for the year. One of the most egregious ones involved a hijacked UPS delivery truck on the Interstate Highway down in Miami a year or so back, where they not only perforated the van, but also vehicles around it, and I'm pretty sure a few people as well. Nor was that a one-off. There are a number of cases in the news right now about people suing because the police displayed excessive force on their deceased relatives.

I've said that police badge numbers should be prefixed with "00" as they are empowered to basically kill at will. Even Judge Dredd would be taken aback.

I've seen future officers training at one of the local colleges. Military style, complete with their own marching song. But actual military veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan have weighed in saying that battle rules of engagement are more strict about shooting people than US cops are.

I've often wondered whether the US penchant for resolving conflict with bullets isn't in large part because if you simply start punching people the lawyers come in and ruin everything, but there's no question that the mythology that a gun solves all problems is very pervasive here. I think there were at least 3 heavy-duty shootings in the news just yesterday.

[Mike Simmons]

Campbell Ritchie wrote:How do you get 37 shots out of a six‑shooter?

It's called reloading.

Though more seriously, yes as Tim notes, there is often a group of officers involved, not just one.  All of whom can claim that they had to make a split-second decision with a reasonable fear for their own life, if the suspect were to suddenly produce a weapon (though in many cases, no weapon was actually present).