Is it just me?

Mastery of any subject comes in many stages and the ability to teach off the dome is one of the last stages.

I’m a native English speaker and I stick around to see the explanations since I don’t know most of the “rules” but find everyone’s explanations fascinating! I don’t think it’s always necessary to know exact reasons as long as the meaning is understood.

Having a good grasp on English does not automatically make you good at advising others. Same as any other skill. You need to know what you're talking about and also how to word it in a way that is helpful to learners, which takes a good bit of thought. Teaching isn't easy, even if you're probably here mostly teaching older teens at the youngest. Try and think about *why* something is off in English and *why* you do the "correct" convention. I think the biggest example is the Romance Native Language Detector of "How do you call this?" you'll often see here. Try and explain to yourself why "How do you call this?" is incorrect for that statement and why English uses "What do you call this?" >!It's because "how do you call this?" sounds like you're asking how to contact the thing you're talking about, while "what do you call this?" is asking for a replacement of "what", a correct way to respond would be "you call this [x]", with [x] replacing "what".!<

you should know that many native speakers can’t help with a lot of the questions asked here either. we may be able to chime in with our own experiences saying certain things, but not be able to explain *why* we say it that way because it’s our first language, we simply don’t have to think about it as hard as english learners do. some people have extended knowledge of english rules thanks to their jobs or hobbies, but they’re very much in the minority. there’s also the fact that most native speakers are not speaking completely proper english 100% of the time lol all this to say, don’t feel discouraged! you probably know more than a lot of native speakers

Since this is an English sub, I’ll correct your use of *em’*. Since you’re removing the beginning of the word (the “th” in “them”), the apostrophe should be at the front of *em* to represent the missing letters. So rather than *em’*, the correct way to write this is *’em*. :) “I did it to ‘em!”

I’ve been learning English for years, and sometimes I know something sounds wrong, but I can’t explain why. Like my brain just goes, “Nope, that’s not it,” but doesn’t give me the right answer lol. I think it’s pretty common, especially when you’re not actively studying grammar rules. Sometimes I’ll look up the rule after seeing a question here, and it’s like, “Ohhh, that’s why it sounds weird.” It’s actually helped me learn more!

I have lost count of the number of times I've read a thread and just thought to myself, "I can tell you what is correct, but I cannot explain to you WHY it's correct. It just IS.'

I think it’s the native language *nuance* we have. It’s natural. That doesn’t mean I haven’t met people with English as their second language, can’t explain or give advice to others, I think it’s the comfort of them being immersed in the language and culture. This goes between English speakers as well. If I advise an American, we have that in common, but advising an Aussie? Might miss that nuance.

It is possible to speak and write with rigorous grammatical exactitude and not be able to explain the first thing about the language. (At any rate, that's what I tell myself. Repeatedly.) Spelling, grammar, and usage rules always follow spoken and written language, and are an attempt to figure out exactly *why* any particular quirk/rule/habit exists. As speech and writing evolve continually, usage descriptions are always a couple of steps behind. Why is the possessive form of "it" written as "its" without the customary possessive apostrophe? Well... you know... it just is. Where the hell did we come up with the phrase "Now, then," which does not refer in any way to time? To be honest, nobody is really sure. And what, in the name of the nine Muses, is up with the expression "OK"? Um... it's interesting you bring that up. What a great question. My golly.

The apostrophe in ‘em goes in front of the word, not behind. The apostrophe is meant to stand in for the missing letters, so it goes where they would go. In this case, the missing “th” in the word “them”.

Especially in English, answering a question about "why is this.....?" is very difficult without a vast knowledge of historical linguistics

If it helps, half of the people who suggest answers here have no clue what they are talking about. Teaching other people English is hard. Being a native speaker is often (usually?) not enough to be able to use the language effectively or to be able to explain it.

Understanding something requires a different set of skills than teaching it.

I thought western English high school was not detailed enough in grammar. It was always “write an essay”. We rarely learned any real grammar, but then you would get penalized for mistakes. Whereas if you learn French, you learn what every little part is called. The passé composée. Nobody knows what a past participle is in English. High school needs more grammar.

I think it’s a very high level to be able to get the nuance of what is wrong with a sentence if it’s not obvious. If you are not immersed in English it would be harder

Some of the questions are convoluted AF or utilize antiquated uncommon speech or the test question was poorly crafted in the first place to be intentionally confusing.