You certainly can use the present tense (I am, he is, we are, etc) about a scheduled event, and many people do so when discussing a forthcoming birthday. I am sixty tomorrow, I am fifty in March, I am fifty in two years, I am forty in four weeks, I am 35 in a couple of months. You can also say (e.g.) 'I will be 26 in a few weeks', and British users may ...
Want to add to the accepted answer: using the present tense to speak about future events is common, but to my intuitive understanding as a native US speaker is incorrect... except that it's understood to be a shortening of saying "I am/I'm going to be 20 years old next month."
Saying "I will/I'll be 20 years old next month" is ...
When asking about arrangements we usually use the present continuous:
Are you working tonight?
When asking people to make a decision about something in the future we use will:
Will you work tonight?
Example (2) makes it sound as if the listener has a choice over whether they will work. It might be understood as a request by the speaker asking them to ...
OP is mistaken in thinking that native Anglophones wouldn't say I will fly to London after 10 days.
The only relevant factor here is that after [some amount of time] requires a context within which some particular point in time (past or future) has already been established. Thus...
I'll go to Glasgow on December the 12th, and stay with my aunt. I will fly ...
You should use the second option ("be working").
Will you work tonight? sounds rather rude, because it sounds like you are asking if they are planning on actually doing their job—as if you expect them to be at work, but not doing what they should be doing.
Will you be working tonight? is more polite, because it is simply asking if they will be at ...
Breaking it down:
The vaccination was in April.
You could get the booster after six months [had passed].
In other words, as of September onwards.
They will continue until 12 December, but will be reassessed after 10 days."
That means as of 22 December, those measures will be reassessed. Anytime AFTER that. It is not specific.
Those measures ...
No, they don't have the same meaning.
When the present simple has a future meaning, it is used for scheduled future events, like a train's departure time or a regular event:
My train leaves at 8:42 am.
I play in my hockey league this Tuesday evening.
Note the inclusion of the future scheduled time. Without the future time included somewhere in the context, ...
The phrase ever published means "published at any time". The word published is an adjective formed from the past participle of the verb; it is not a tensed form of the verb.
P.S. You can think of the past participle form of the verb (and adjectives formed from it) as being disconnected from time. The participle form refers to a timeless state. The state ...
I think the distinction here is when you start counting.
"I will fly to London in ten days' time" means ten days from now, the time of speaking. If you want to start counting the ten days from some other point, you would use "after" (or "later"), for example "I will go to New York, then fly to London after ten days" ...
It could be; but are is more natural.
Because of that, you would only use will be to indicate that something is likely to change. So
When you've finished your degree there might be other things you will be interested in.
suggests that something will have changed (in you, or in the world) by the time you've done your degree, to give you these other ...
The difference between the two is that “when” implies certainty. You are sure your son will complete his work, and then you will go to the restaurant.
“If” is uncertain. Your son might complete his work, or he might not. If he does, you will go to the restaurant.
Also, you need to add “the” before “restaurant.”
Yes, all those sentences are grammatical.
By tomorrow, he will have left Paris. When tomorrow comes, he will no longer be in Paris. It doesn't say exactly when he will leave.
I will leave Paris by tomorrow. I promise/intend to leave tomorrow or earlier.
I will have left Paris by tomorrow. I confidently predict that when tomorrow comes, I will no longer be in ...
The key here is that the situation is explained as: "You have decided to hire a car". The decision has been made, even if you have not hired the car yet. This means the situation is not about a spontaneous decision, but rather a planned one, so 'going to' fits the bill perfectly.
We're going to hire a car
This has been decided in advance
I might have changed my mind by then
I may change my mind by then
Both are valid, usage depends on the individual. Personally I would say 'might have changed' indicates that its slightly more likely to happen, 'may change' is a little more uncertain, but its very close between the two.
This is a perfect example of how colloquial speech leaves out or contracts redundant words.
Your third quote shows "I am 20..." as acceptable, and "I'm 20..." is merely the shortened (spoken or even lazy) way of saying the same.
Upshot - your app isn't quite smart enough to know they're the same.
Will you work this evening?
This could be a request. I want you to work this evening so I want to know if you are willing.
It could also be a question about whether you will do even a little bit of work. If you plan to work, even for 5 minutes, then I need to make sure the office has electricity. Otherwise I can rewire the office tonight.
Will you be working ...
Expanding on Lambie's comment, yes, "I go to bathroom then I come to bed" is wrong in the case you're describing.
If you're telling your daughter what you're about to do, "I go to the bathroom then I come to bed" isn't right, because it's present tense - it sounds as if you're already doing both of those things now, but you're not. Since ...
There's a fairly subtle difference in meaning here. After 10 days means that the measures are in place now, and their effects will be reassessed after having 10 days experience with them.
If you say you will do something in 10 days, that implies that you are not doing it now, and won't be doing it until those 10 days have passed.
Since this is an article about Austria, and I am Austrian, I guess there is something I can add as detail. I found quite the same statement in German (Austria's native language) at www.austria.info on 21st of November, so one day before the lockdown begins:
Dieser Lockdown ab Montag, 22. November wird nach 10 Tagen evaluiert und soll spätestens mit 13. ...
Q1. All of these sentences are correct and will be easily understood.
Q2. There are some subtle meaning differences between these sentences. "She hopes" from the first two statements denotes a level of certainty about the plans she's making. Maybe she has generally good credit and income, but her dog just got sick and she needs a loan to cover ...
If something has not yet happened in the future.
The movie will have started by the time we get to the theater as it'll take us 20 minutes to get there. [FUTURE perfect]
There is an event preceding the getting there in the future: the event is that the movie started before you got there.
Think of it as parallel to:
The movie had started by the time ...
"Later" is a comparative term, like 'hotter', 'darker', etc.
When we say "I'll call you later", it means at some point later than now. But if you bring a specific time into it as in your example of "a week", it doesn't make any sense unless you give a starting point to count that week from.
For example, you could say "I'll ...
Both constructions are valid but they look at the completion of your work from different time perspectives.
The first example looks forward to the completion of your work.
In the second example, you are writing from the perspective of someone who has completed the task. You are looking back on a future event.
We often use this latter construction when we are ...
Melanie starts school tomorrow.
Melanie will start school tomorrow.
are both correct. However, it is very common using present to express future, so your first example is the more acceptable.
However, there is another problem I want to emphasize:
Melanie will start school from tomorrow.
is incorrect, because there is no match between start and ...
The only interpretation under which he works late is possible here is meaning he always works late on Mondays: there's a strong implication that the hearers know this, or should know this.
The sentences you quote from the grammar book simply do not apply to this case, but I'm not clear why not. I'll think about it.
Edit: I think I've got at least part of it. ...
No, this isn't describing the future. This falls under the "Actions started in the past and continuing in the present" use of the present perfect as described here: https://www.ef.edu/english-resources/english-grammar/present-perfect/ .
No. In English it is very common to use the present tense to refer to an activity that will actually happen in the future.
You can think of it as meaning:
Sorry, I have to work [at that time]. I don't have the time [then].
I might use "won't" instead of "don't," but definitely not "will have" instead of "have."