<p>The problem Seachai is twofold. To begin with, your grammar is just wrong. I’ll give an example.</p>
<p>“My parents were born from Asian countries.”</p>
<p>The words “born” and “from” cannot be used together in this manner. You could either say “My parents were born in Asian countries” (by no means an excellent sentence, but at least one that makes sense,) or you could say “My parents were from Asian countries.” You can’t combine the two.</p>
<p>Secondly, your misuse of obscure and esoteric words is indicative of improper use of a thesaurus. The problem with using a thesaurus to replace a “difficult” word with an “easy” one is that the two are not always interchangeable. Once again, an example.</p>
<p>" love how purely ignorant kids like you make an assumption out of someone else in order to create further truculence and garbage talk. Personally, since you were the smart person to even make the even the odds, I suggest you bring your digression to somewhere else before you embarrass yourself further by making another fallacious premonition."</p>
<p>First, you don’t create truculence. In the way that you’re attempting to use it, you most likely meant the noun, meaning something to the effect of “cruel actions.” You don’t “create cruel actions.” You influence/inspire/compel cruel actions, you act cruelly, but you don’t “create” cruel actions. If I were to say that the Americans created attacks in the middle east, or created cruel actions in the middle east, you would correct me. My guess is that you originally had different words than truculence and create in place, and used the thesaurus to enhance the sentence. </p>
<p>Bring is a transitive verb. Transitive verbs are derived from basic verbs; in this case, bring is the causative transitive form of come. Many people learning English as a second language can confuse the words “bring” and “take.” For an easy rule, try changing your sentence to incorporate the phrase “make […] come” or “make […] go.” You should ask yourself, “do I want to say ‘make your digression come elsewhere’ or 'make your digression go elsewhere.” The latter sentence, while imperfect, sounds much better. You want the digression to “go,” not “come” (obvious jokes aside.) </p>
<p>Premonition applies specifically to future events. It is very similar to a prediction, differing primarily in the participle usage. You make/have made a prediction, and have/have had a premonition. Regardless, either would be wrong in this case. The first poster stated that you only got accepted into a community college. This is an inference of theirs, based on what they knew about you from your previous posts. They aren’t predicting that you’ll only be accepted into a community college; they’re drawing an inference on past events from presently available information. You don’t have “predict” that your mother and your father met at one point in the past; you infer, or realize (though the latter is not meant to be interchangeably used with the former two) the logical conclusion of two axioms.
1.) you exist.
2.) all known cases of human existence were caused by sperm meeting egg.
You of course could be mistaken; you’ve drawn a third assumption into the mix, that sperm and egg meeting means the individual producers met. This of course is an erroneous conclusion; there are plenty of instances of egg and sperm meeting without their producers doing the same, but I digress.
Similarly, the other poster has made an inference, based on available information. However, he has not had a premonition in regard to your future. If he had said “based on your poor grammar, and the subpar use of your vocabulary, I predict that you won’t do well at university.” He may have had a premonition to this effect as well, (though I doubt there was a foreboding undertone to his thoughts on your future performance.) Regardless, I think the point has been beaten into the ground; there can be no premonitions of past events.</p>
<p>-------Edit line-------
“[…]bring your digression to somewhere else.”
I already covered the misuse of bring, but the “to” is bugging me. When you use “to” to signify a location, it needs to be a specific place. I’m going to Cedar Point. This works because I’m referring to a very specific location. I’m going to the amusement park. By using the word “the,” I signify a shared understanding of a specific location, even though I haven’t named it outright. “I’m going to amusement park.” Wrong, just wrong.</p>