who's mother language is english ???please help me!

thank you very much really help me a lot

I know that tenses in English are difficult. The problem is that each language has its own rules, really, and that the idea of a 'tense' is something that really comes from Latin and Greek grammar. Other languages (including English) have different ways of expressing WHEN an action was/is/will be performed (or when it MIGHT happen/have happened, IF ... [some condition occurs]. Your language (and thought process) may make no distinction in the verb itself between whether something happened continuously in the past or whether it happened only once; it may not use a different verb form for something that really happened/is happening/is about to happen and something that could happen/have happened. Part of it is to do with the way that different cultures perceive events and part of it is to do with the way that each of us have of expressing what we mean. Latin and Greek (and Sanskrit) have different verb forms and endings to show different variations of 'time': English and many other languages don't do it in quite the same way and have to add words (called auxiliary verbs - 'have', 'be', 'may', 'might', 'will', 'shall', 'can' and so on) to express all the variations. This can be VERY confusing to someone who is used to expressing these things in another language (and even native English speakers don't always use the same methods and sometimes use expressions which are considered 'incorrect' or 'dialect' by other speakers!). If you visited England and, for example, asked people in different parts of the country what they will do when they reach a certain age, you might receive different answers, depending on where you were in the country! In most of the south-east, you would expect to hear: "When I am 65 ...", "When you are 65 ...", "When he/she is 65 ..." &c (and the contractions: "I'm", "You're", "He's/She's" &c) but in the west and north of England you would often hear: "When I be 65 ...", "When thou/du bist/beest 65 ...", "When he/'er/she/'er is 65 ..." and so on! I suppose that you want to be able to speak English as 'the BBC' or 'educated Americans' do. That is what is understood as 'English' the world over. But other ways of saying things are really just as valid (including 'Indian' English ... that is English as spoken in India as a whole). What is important is to be sure that you will be understood, where ever you go where people understand English, and also (to a lesser extent) not to sound too 'regional' or 'stilted' or 'bookish'. It really is a very difficult thing for foreigners (and would be quite as difficult for me if I were to come to your country!) but humour, humility, willingness to understand and to learn - and, in addition, a confidence that you will be befriended and friendly where ever you go - are really the best the best weapons you have!

If you are writing as you would speak: "thank you very much really help me a lot" might be: "Thank you very much [It] really helped me a lot." 'helped' because you WERE helped [by what I wrote]. If 'it' is implied (but not written, which is acceptable in speech or colloquial writing) then you have to use the correct [3rd person singular] verb form - '[it] helps', '[it] helped', '[it] will help' and so on.

I think that verbs (and especially the conditional and past tenses) are the main problem that people have with English. We English tend to use them correctly without knowing why or how; other nationalities (Indian and Chinese, for example) have difficulty with using them correctly and many English speakers don't understand the problems and don't know how to explain! "If I will/would have the opportunity to meet someone famous ..." is not correct. "If I were to have ..." is correct but a little 'dated'. Most people these days would say "If I had ...". 'Will' and 'would' really imply a conscious intention. 'Shall' and 'should' mean that something is going to happen whether we like it or not, 'can' and 'could' refer more to an ability to do something. Many people use 'shall' and 'will' interchangeably (and, strictly speaking, incorrectly). "If I will/would have the opportunity ..." really implies that one could choose to have the opportunity (opportunities and chances usually can't be chosen ... they happen ... though one can choose to ignore them!) "He asked me if I would go to the movie with him" is correct and is 'reported speech'. It's identical to saying "He said/asked, 'Will you go to the movie with me?'" but not quite the same as "He said, 'Would you go to the movie with me?'" nor to "He said, 'Shall we go to the movie?'" You can see that it gets quite complicated! The rest of your rendition is perfect ... except for 'wanna'!!! Please, never write 'wanna'! It may be how it sometimes sounds (and song writers, especially, do write it that way) but it should always be written 'want to' and, especially in an aural exam, pronounced that way - as two words.

Your pointers are such a big help. Yes, I agree that English speakers sometimes cannot really point out why it was an error, but they just know that there was. I think it is because I am more accustomed to the American English that ...well, I guess American English does have more slang or incorrect usage but are just neglected or accepted anyway, so I also tend to do that. I also overlooked the fact that he is taking an exam. I stand corrected about the "wanna". I learned a lot from you. So, thank you.