<MSGID_1=3A387=2F22_51cc64d0@fidonet.org>
From: alexander koryagin <koryagin@erec.ru>

Hi, Roy Witt!
I read your message from 27.06.2013 11:10

 ak>> A car driver knocked down a pedestrian at a pedestrian crossing.
 ak>> The driver to the pedestrian: "Oh, you are lucky today! I am a
 ak>> doctor!" The pedestrian: "But you a not lucky. I am a lawyer."

 RW> A car driver knocked down a pedestrian in a pedestrian crosswalk.

BTW, I am often confused about prepositions "at" and "in" in cases when
I tell about crosswalks and squares. For instance, I understand, that a
street is something long and it is not a place, is not a point. So I use
"in", for example:

There is a man in the street.

But what if I tell about a point, a place, where something has happened?
Can I use "at"? IMHO it is quite logical, especially when I tell about
the place:

"Where is John?" "He is at the market" "Where is his monument?" "It is
at Trafalgar Square."


<skipped>
 ak>> The most reliable shelters against Russia's nuclear rockets are
 ak>> under American banks.
 RW> The most reliable shelter against Russian nuclear bombs are in the
 RW> vaults of Georgian banks.

Where are they? In Georgia, the Caucasus? 

 RW> Russian rockets would be intercepted and destroyed by American
 RW> satellites using rocket killer lasers from space.

Can we have in Russia laser killers for the American satellites? 

 ak>> If you want your guests to be off, ask them for money. If you want
 ak>> them to stay, ask for advice.

 RW> If you want your guests to leave, ask them for money. If you want
 RW> them to stay, ask them for advice.

I wonder, maybe "be off" is more rude, and therefore is more apt when it
applied to annoying guests? 


Bye, Roy!
Alexander Koryagin
fido7.english-tutor 2013
--- ifmail v.2.15dev5.4
 * Origin: NPO RUSnet InterNetNews site (2:5020/400)