What does he say between according to my and appalling understanding?

[svetlana14]

00:56 [

]. What does he say between according to my and appalling understanding?

 

[Barque]

I think he was just searching for words. It sounds like Oh! umm. Or perhaps No! umm.

 

[teechar]

It seems that initially he was feeling rather brazen and wanted to add just a weak qualification to "my understanding" such as "not perfect" [not is his; perfect is mine], but then he decided that it would be better to strengthen that qualification (his defense) by suggesting that his understanding (of global economic issues) is appalling.

 

[svetlana14]

1. What does he say at 00:28-00-32 after like to pledge that actually?

2. Is the name Keith here at 00:32?

 

[teechar]

No, no. Let's go high(er); let's go 1.2. What (are) we on at the moment Keith?

 

[svetlana14]

No, no. Let's go high(er); let's go 1.2. What (are) we on at the moment Keith?

Do round brackets () suggest that (er) and (are) can harldy be identified but they should be grammatically.

 

[svetlana14]

No, no. Let's go high(er); let's go 1.2. What (are) we on at the moment Keith?

What does heading for menacing for penancing mean here? 00:43

 

[svetlana14]

No, no. Let's go high(er); let's go 1.2. What (are) we on at the moment Keith?

I am a little bit confused about the way (logic) James criticizes the five-pledges plan.

1. Why does he use points like 1.1, 1.2.? instead of just referring to 1, 2, 3... What is the key idea behind that?
2. When he speaks "Let's go higher", does he mean going to the point 1.2. or just giving a sarcastic imaginary figure of 1.2 million jumping from a million?
3. Who is Keith?

 

[5jj]

Please wait for responses to questions already asked before posting more questions.

 

[teechar]

Do round brackets () suggest that (er) and (are) can hardly be identified but they should be there to make the sentence grammatical? ly.

They're there, but not clearly said.
I'll leave it for other members to answer your subsequent questions. I'm sorry, but I don't have that much interest to delve further into the context of this video.

 

[svetlana14]

They're there, but not clearly said.
I'll leave it for other members to answer your subsequent questions. I'm sorry, but I don't have that much interest to delve further into the context of this video.

I am sorry for asking so much questions on the context. I was struggling to understand the details as Jame's metaphors (and his manner of critising) are so contextual and tied to British politics that it is difficult to understand what he says for foreigners like me.

 

[teechar]

I was struggling to understand the details as Jame's metaphors (and his manner of critisizing)

I really don't think his wit is sharp or that his metaphors are particularly clever. And for what it's worth, neither do I think that he's a model for learning pronunciation from.
By the way, "menancing for a penancing" doesn't exist in English (not even those two actual words), but "cruising for a bruising" is very casual and just means "looking/asking for trouble".

 

[svetlana14]

I really don't think his wit is sharp or that his metaphors are particularly clever. And for what it's worth, neither do I think that he's a model for learning pronunciation from.
By the way, "menancing for a penancing" doesn't exist in English (not even those two actual words), but "cruising for a bruising" is very casual and just means "looking/asking for trouble".

Would you and other members of the forum be comfortable if I ask just a couple of questions (if I have ones) relating to very short episodes (up to one minute) based on youtube clips of LBC's presenters including James and Nick Ferarri, which I will combine with other channels, programmes, the like without overloading you with political shows inlcuding the LBC?

 

[5jj]

Would you and other members of the forum be comfortable if I ask just a couple of questions

I can't speak for other members, but my personal response is 'No'. I come here to do my best to help people with questions about English.

 

[emsr2d2]

If you're talking about asking questions about the content, rather than questions about English, I'm with 5jj.

Even if you're asking for help with the English, an occasional video clip is one thing, but to continually post YouTube (or other platform) videos that we have to watch and transcribe really isn't the best use of our time. I suggest that if you're going to watch videos, make sure (in advance) that subtitles are available. Watch without subtitles and then, if you're unsure about any parts, put the subtitles on.

 

[svetlana14]

If you're talking about asking questions about the content, rather than questions about English, I'm with 5jj.

Even if you're asking for help with the English, an occasional video clip is one thing, but to continually post YouTube (or other platform) videos that we have to watch and transcribe really isn't the best use of our time. I suggest that if you're going to watch videos, make sure (in advance) that subtitles are available. Watch without subtitles and then, if you're unsure about any parts, put the subtitles on.

I am sorry about that. If you’d told me beforehand, I would never have bothered you, respecting your time and efforts. Please also note that I continually post YouTube just to better understand English of political and social life. I thought that LBC related clips is the best platform. I have never deliberately attempted to involve you in a transcribing process whatsoever, trying to use very limited intervals of relative short episodes of YouTube.

 

[emsr2d2]

I am sorry about that. If you’d told me beforehand, I would never have bothered you, respecting your time and efforts. Please also note that I continually post YouTube just to better understand English of political and social life. I thought that LBC related clips is the best platform. I have never deliberately attempted to involve you in a transcribing process whatsoever, trying to use very limited intervals of relative short episodes of YouTube.

I'm not suggesting that you're trying to get us (in an underhand way) to transcribe these videos but, in order to answer your questions, we have to listen to/watch the videos, work out what the person is saying and then post it. I thought that's what you wanted. I really don't think LBC is a great platform for you to concentrate on. Despite the fact that most of the videos you've posted have been of the host James O'Brien, who describes himself as a champagne socialist, the majority of the presenters on the station are very right-wing. The members of the public who phone in are also generally quite extreme in their views. My concern is that even though you might be improving your understanding of the English used in political and social shows like this, you will be getting a skewed view of life in the UK and of the views of most reasonable members of the public. What I'm trying to say is that you're only improving your understanding of the English used by a fairly biased minority of people.

Here's what the Media Bias Fact Check site has to say about LBC.

 

[svetlana14]

I'm not suggesting that you're trying to get us (in an underhand way) to transcribe these videos but, in order to answer your questions, we have to listen to/watch the videos, work out what the person is saying and then post it. I thought that's what you wanted. I really don't think LBC is a great platform for you to concentrate on. Despite the fact that most of the videos you've posted have been of the host James O'Brien, who describes himself as a champagne socialist, the majority of the presenters on the station are very right-wing. The members of the public who phone in are also generally quite extreme in their views. My concern is that even though you might be improving your understanding of the English used in political and social shows like this, you will be getting a skewed view of life in the UK and of the views of most reasonable members of the public. What I'm trying to say is that you're only improving your understanding of the English used by a fairly biased minority of people.

Here's what the Media Bias Fact Check site has to say about LBC.

Can you please advise on an alternative of LBC. Times Radio?

 

[emsr2d2]

I wasn't familiar with Times Radio but a quick Google tells me you might have the same problem. It was launched by Rupert Murdoch, one of the most controversial and right-wing people in British media. At best, it's viewed as centre-right. It's notoriously difficult to find genuinely unbiased news reporting.
When you said you wanted to better understand "English of political and social life", did you mean the English language in general or that used solely in England? Also, are you specifically looking for everyday English used by members of the public rather than presenters?

 

[svetlana14]

I wasn't familiar with Times Radio but a quick Google tells me you might have the same problem. It was launched by Rupert Murdoch, one of the most controversial and right-wing people in British media. At best, it's viewed as centre-right. It's notoriously difficult to find genuinely unbiased news reporting.
When you said you wanted to better understand "English of political and social life", did you mean the English language in general or that used solely in England? Also, are you specifically looking for everyday English used by members of the public rather than presenters?

I started with Steve Allen but you can hardly find many and regular YouTube video with him and his focus is more social life, newspapers. I was trying to find shows using key words like British/UK political shows, but google suggests just TV series. Regarding your specifc question, yes just now my preference is British English focusing on political and social life based on political shows, various interviews etc. (but I read American newspapers, watch CNN, Bloomberg).