April 25, 2026
Bologna (3/3) The Dark Side
One thing I should note, though, is safety. I felt less secure in Bologna than I did in other Italian cities. I've seen more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street, and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
To be honest, the area around the university looked more like a ghetto: loud music, lots of weed-smokers and plenty of communist posters. I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, that came as a surprise.
I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna. The city is quite small, after all. However, I would really regret not going there at all!
Correction Settings
Bologna (3/3) The Dark Side
One thing I should note, though, is safety.
I felt less secure in Bologna than I did in other Italian cities.
I've seen saw more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street [there], and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
I saw more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street [there], and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
I think it's because by using past tense before you imply you're not in Bologna anymore. If you're not in Bologna anymore, it doesn't make sense to use the present perfect here, which would imply that seeing homeless on the street is a situation that's still occurring.
To be honest, the area around the university looked more like a ghetto: loud music, lots of weed-smokers and plenty of communist posters.
I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, that came as a surprise.
I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna.
The city is quite small, after all.
However, I would've really regretted not going there at all! However, I would've really regretted not going there at all!
Feedback
I guess that's the flipside to it being a non-touristy location.
Bologna (3/3) The Dark Side
One thing I should note, though, is safety.
I felt less secure in Bologna than I did in other Italian cities.
I've seen saw more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street, and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
I saw more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street, and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
This is a very minor correction; it sounds slightly more natural to say "I saw"; alternatives:
1. There were more homeless... < ---- probably the best option here.
2. I could see more homeless...
"I've seen" in this context is fine to be honest, the meaning is clear, but better to say "I saw" - just like in the sentence before you wrote "I felt" instead of "I have felt" which sounds better.
To be honest, the area around the university looked more like a ghetto: loud music, lots of weed-smokers and plenty of communist posters.
I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, thait came as a surprise.
I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, it came as a surprise.
Again, a very minor correction.
I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna. I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna.
You could also say:
1. I am secretly glad...
2. I am kind of glad...
3. I am sort of glad...
4. Perhaps I am glad...
"Low-key" sounds very American.
The city is quite small, after all.
However, I would really regret not going there at all! However, I would really regret not going there at all!
Alternative:
I would have really regretted not going at all!
Feedback
Your English is very good and doesn't need corrections for meaning. These are stylistic points.
April 25, 2026
I've seen saw more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street, and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
This is a very minor correction; it sounds slightly more natural to say "I saw"; alternatives:
1. There were more homeless... < ---- probably the best option here.
2. I could see more homeless...
"I've seen" in this context is fine to be honest, the meaning is clear, but better to say "I saw" - just like in the sentence before you wrote "I felt" instead of "I have felt" which sounds better.
Is it because it has all happened in one day, whereas "have seen" indicates more of prolonged time? I want to understand the logic behind this mistake so that I don't repeat it later.
April 25, 2026
Many thanks for your help, maritozzo!
April 25, 2026
Is it because it has all happened in one day, whereas "have seen" indicates more of prolonged time? I want to understand the logic behind this mistake so that I don't repeat it later.
Yes, I think so. I would say that grammatically, it works better to use the same tense as suggested by @maritozzo (I felt, I saw) because you are talking about the same time period.
"I've seen" does not sound correct in this context. I think it would be better used to talk about a longer period of time (in my lifetime, I've seen an increase in homeless people on the streets), or to describe a time or event more distant from the present (I've seen homeless people before, but never this many in one place). Does that help?
April 25, 2026
Yes, I think so. I would say that grammatically, it works better to use the same tense as suggested by @maritozzo (I felt, I saw) because you are talking about the same time period. "I've seen" does not sound correct in this context. I think it would be better used to talk about a longer period of time (in my lifetime, I've seen an increase in homeless people on the streets), or to describe a time or event more distant from the present (I've seen homeless people before, but never this many in one place). Does that help?
Immensely! Tenses can be confusing, huh?
April 25, 2026
Yes, I think so. I would say that grammatically, it works better to use the same tense as suggested by @maritozzo (I felt, I saw) because you are talking about the same time period. "I've seen" does not sound correct in this context. I think it would be better used to talk about a longer period of time (in my lifetime, I've seen an increase in homeless people on the streets), or to describe a time or event more distant from the present (I've seen homeless people before, but never this many in one place). Does that help?
I agree with this - when you say "I've seen..." in this context, it makes it sound like you are about to connect an idea from another time/place than the one you are describing, for example:
"I've seen homeless people before, but never this many in one place." <--- comparing your experience in Bologna to something else.
I think the best way to write it is in the same way that you wrote the second half of your sentence:
"...and the scammers were much more intrusive too." <---- this was perfect, and you didn't say:
"...and the scammers I MET were much more intrusive..." or:
"...and the scammers WHO TRIED TO SCAM ME were much more intrusive too."
These extra verbs are kind of redundant (like the verb TO SEE in the first part of the sentence) since they are implied by your description anyway.
So:
"There were more homeless..."
|
Bologna (3/3) The Dark Side This sentence has been marked as perfect! This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
One thing I should note, though, is safety. This sentence has been marked as perfect! This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
I felt less secure in Bologna than I did in other Italian cities. This sentence has been marked as perfect! This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
I've seen more homeless, mentally unstable people on the street, and the scammers were much more intrusive, too.
I This is a very minor correction; it sounds slightly more natural to say "I saw"; alternatives: 1. There were more homeless... < ---- probably the best option here. 2. I could see more homeless... "I've seen" in this context is fine to be honest, the meaning is clear, but better to say "I saw" - just like in the sentence before you wrote "I felt" instead of "I have felt" which sounds better.
I I think it's because by using past tense before you imply you're not in Bologna anymore. If you're not in Bologna anymore, it doesn't make sense to use the present perfect here, which would imply that seeing homeless on the street is a situation that's still occurring. |
|
To be honest, the area around the university looked more like a ghetto: loud music, lots of weed-smokers and plenty of communist posters. This sentence has been marked as perfect! This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
I assume it's like that almost everywhere in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, that came as a surprise. |
|
I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day there. |
|
However, I would regret not going there at all! |
|
However, I would really regret not going there at all! However, I would really regret not going there at all! However, I would really regret not going there at all! Alternative: I would have really regretted not going at all! However, I would've really regretted not going there at all! However, I would've really regretted not going there at all! |
|
I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, that came as a surprise.
I assume it's like that in almost every university town in Western Europe nowadays, but given the history behind the place, Again, a very minor correction. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna. I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna. I am low-key glad that I didn't spend more than one day in Bologna. You could also say: 1. I am secretly glad... 2. I am kind of glad... 3. I am sort of glad... 4. Perhaps I am glad... "Low-key" sounds very American. This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
|
The city is quite small, after all. This sentence has been marked as perfect! This sentence has been marked as perfect! |
You need LangCorrect Premium to access this feature.
Go Premium