[Idiom] break in

notletrest said:

As for train, what is the difference between break and break in? By the way ,what's the meaning of "in " here? Thanks a lot!

Click to expand...

I don't know what either "break" or "break in" would have to do with a train. Can you explain please?

N.A.T.

I don't understand why anyone would break in a train either.
Are you referring to a money train? I don't know about the correct term, but there was a very spectacular crime in the UK in the 1960's.

To train someone is also to break them in, in the early stages of the training.

While your question isn't very clear, I think you might find your answer here. break-in - Definition of break-in at YourDictionary.com

emsr2d2 said:

I don't know what either "break" or "break in" would have to do with a train. Can you explain please?

Click to expand...

To my surprise ,an Englishman should say "to break or break in " and "to train" are different pairs of shoes. As long as you open "The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" by " Oxford University Press 1963" and look up "break" at page 114 , you wil l read "train or disiplline : break a horse (in)". In mine aove , I only omitted all the symbols of to before infinitives for short.
Thanks for your concern!

You can also break a pair of shoes in, which has nothing to do with train. The phrasal verb can also mean "familiarise", "accustom", and "tame", as with a wild horse.

notletrest said:

To my surprise ,an Englishman should say "to break or break in " and "to train" are different pairs of shoes. As long as you open "The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" by " Oxford University Press 1963" and look up "break" at page 114 , you wil l read "train or disiplline : break a horse (in)". In mine aove , I only omitted all the symbols of to before infinitives for short.
Thanks for your concern!

Click to expand...

To my surprise ,an Englishman should say "to break or break in " and "to train" are different pairs of shoes. As long as you open "The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" by " Oxford University Press 1963" and look up "break" at page 114 , you wil l read "train or disiplline : break a horse (in)". In mine above , I only omitted all the symbols of to before infinitives for short.
Thanks for your concern![/

notletrest said:

To my surprise ,an Englishman should say "to break or break in " and "to train" are different pairs of shoes. As long as you open "The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" by " Oxford University Press 1963" and look up "break" at page 114 , you wil l read "train or disiplline : break a horse (in)". In mine above , I only omitted all the symbols of to before infinitives for short.
Thanks for your concern![/

Click to expand...

Now I'm confused by the use of "different pairs of shoes" and can't work out the relevance!!

In the hopes that I've vaguely got the point of the question, the phrasal verb "to break in" when referring to horses does mean to take a previously untamed horse and start to train it so that it's happy to be ridden.

We also "break in" a pair of shoes, wearing them a few times and walking around the house or the local area to help to stretch the material and make the shoes more comfortable before wearing them for an extended period. Ah, have I just worked out the relevance of "different pairs of shoes".

emsr2d2 said:

Now I'm confused by the use of "different pairs of shoes" and can't work out the relevance!!

In the hopes that I've vaguely got the point of the question, the phrasal verb "to break in" when referring to horses does mean to take a previously untamed horse and start to train it so that it's happy to be ridden.

We also "break in" a pair of shoes, wearing them a few times and walking around the house or the local area to help to stretch the material and make the shoes more comfortable before wearing them for an extended period. Ah, have I just worked out the relevance of "different pairs of shoes".

Click to expand...

Mr emsr2d2 is really a man of humour. I don't know whether I can creatively use the English proverb "That's another pair of shoes." It is because you said you couldn't see the relevance of "train ,break and break in " in your first answer. That is to say to train is one thing , to break is another and to break in is anther pair of shoes,too. I think so. In order to sum up the above meaning I changed the proverb form into "they are differnt pairs of shoes to express your meaning in another way. From your second answer I can see my usage of the proverb is wrong. Is it so?
I am waiting for you sincerely.

emsr is not a Mr.

No, the expression "that's a different pair of shoes" does not translate as an idiom. I had no idea what you meant.

We do have an expression "that's a horse of a different color" but it wouldn't work very well here.

Just use plain English: I'm surprised to learn that "to train," "to break," and "to break in" have such different meanings.

Barb_D said:

emsr is not a Mr.

No, the expression "that's a different pair of shoes" does not translate as an idiom. I had no idea what you meant.

We do have an expression "that's a horse of a different color" but it wouldn't work very well here.

Just use plain English: I'm surprised to learn that "to train," "to break," and "to break in" have such different meanings.

Click to expand...

You said you are good ,but fact's another pair of shoes. Is that so?
Thanks!

notletrest said:

You said you are good ,but fact's another pair of shoes. Is that so?
Thanks!

Click to expand...

I'm even more lost now. I have a feeling the post above was meant to be a compliment but ...!

Since we've established that none of us can think of an idiom in English that has anything to do with a pair of shoes, different or otherwise, perhaps it's time to stop mentioning them. Yes, I realise just did! ;-)

n.a.t.

We have this expression which quite literally translates to "these are two pairs of shoes" and it means "these are two completely different things".
We also have a lot more expressions that lead back to shoemakers and shoes.
It is quite interesting to me that the English natives could not understand the expression the Op mentioned.

Also funny to see in what "colour" you discuss language., but enough off-topic talk now.

emsr2d2 said:

I'm even more lost now. I have a feeling the post above was meant to be a compliment but ...!

Since we've established that none of us can think of an idiom in English that has anything to do with a pair of shoes, different or otherwise, perhaps it's time to stop mentioning them. Yes, I realise just did! ;-)

Click to expand...

It is common that great men made slight mistakes. Let me give you a few examples.
1)"That's another pair of shoes. " from Far East English- Chinese Dictionary by Liang Sih-chiu 1977.
2) Lickcheese,...I can be sharp as any man when it's a question of business; but dooty' another pair of shoes. (B. Shaw, "Widowers' Houses", act 3 )
3) "You have taken it into your head that I mean to pension you off. ...But I don't mean it." "...that, sir, " replied Mr Wegg. cheering up bravely, "is quite another pair of shoes." (Ch. Dickens, "Our Mutual Friend" book 1 ch .15 )
4) I'll lend you five shillings, but a loan of ten dollars is another pair of shoes. (a certain dictionary)
That's enouh!

Michael84 said:

n.a.t.

We have this expression which quite literally translates to "these are two pairs of shoes" and it means "these are two completely different things".
We also have a lot more expressions that lead back to shoemakers and shoes.
It is quite interesting to me that the English natives could not understand the expression the Op mentioned.

Also funny to see in what "colour" you discuss language., but enough off-topic talk now.

Click to expand...

Now that you've mentioned it, we also have this expression, slightly altered: *That's a different pair of wellingtons. ;-)

In English it might translate into:
That's a different kettle of fish.
That's a different cup of tea.

* [literal translation from Polish]

notletrest said:

It is common that great men made slight mistakes.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that that is suggesting that those who said that ' that's a different pair of shoes' was not a natural English idiom had made a mistake. They haven't. It is not a natural English idiom to most native speakers. It may perhaps, be used in some regional dialects.

That you have found the expression in a dictionary compiled by a Chinese scholar born in 1903, a play performed in the late 19th century, a book written in the 1860s, and an unnamed dictionary do not make it one.

fivejedjon said:

It seems to me that that is suggesting that those who said that ' that's a different pair of shoes' was not a natural English idiom had made a mistake. They haven't. It is not a natural English idiom to most native speakers. It may perhaps, be used in some regional dialects.

That you have found the expression in a dictionary compiled by a Chinese scholar born in 1903, a play performed in the late 19th century, a book written in the 1860s, and an unnamed dictionary do not make it one.

Click to expand...

Mr fivejedjon, We are veteran friends. I respect you very much. You are full of knowledge on English and Chinese literature. From you I learrned a great deal. I think those answers above yours are very thin, especually their attitude is very disgusting. Their knowledge range is very narroow, even not knowing of a pair of shoes, like a frog in a well as the Chinese said, it only knowing the sky is as big as the well. I should admit what I collected are very few. We cannot cut off history ,facing these great English writers, how can we say they are wrong?
I am here to discuss English questions .
let's return to our mutton : what is the difference between to break and to break in as for to train?
Thanks to the web site for offering the place!

notletrest said:

Mr fivejedjon, I think those answers above yours are very thin, especually their attitude is very disgusting.

Click to expand...

I take it that you didn't like them.

let's return to our mutton : what is the difference between to break and to break in as for to train? What is the meaning of "in " here?
Thanks!