I think – not. I think not.

I think – not. I think not.

I think – not. I think not.

I think – not. I think not.

I don't think – notso. I don't think so.

"I think not" sounds kind of poetic, almost Shakespearean. (Although, in that case, I'd remove the "–"). For something more natural, you could say "I don't think so" or, coming from the last sentence, "I don't think I should." "I'm thinking: no" could also work, too, but I would prefer to use the other two.

I don’t care, actually. I don’t care, actually.

Actually I don’t care actually. Actually I don’t care.

Years ago, I watched a vlogger callnamed Nellyfornication (Nelly is a name, if you didn’t know). Years ago, I watched a vlogger named Nellyfornication (Nelly is a name, if you didn’t know).

"Named" is usually used for people instead of "called"

I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a trouble to make a good nick name) and that it was a reference to the famous song. I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a trouble to make a good nickname) and that it was a reference to the famous song.

I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar, and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a trouble to make a good nick name), and it was a reference to the famous song. I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar, and she was not at all my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a trouble to make a good nickname), and it was a reference to the famous song.

I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a troublepain to make a good nick name) and that it was a reference to the famous song. I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was creative enough (it’s such a pain to make a good nick name) and that it was a reference to the famous song.

I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was kind of creative enough (it’s such a trouble(it’s so difficult to make a good nick name) and it was a reference to theis famous song. I didn’t like her – she seemed to be a big liar and she was not at all to my taste, but I thought her channel name was kind of creative (it’s so difficult to make a good nickname) and it was a reference to this famous song.

"Enough" implies a condition that is tied to an action. For example: "It was warm enough that I didn't put on my jacket", "This story is interesting enough that I think I'll keep reading", or for a conditional tense example: "If it rains enough tomorrow, I won't have to water the plants." I would use "kind of" in this scenario, or maybe "pretty" if you want something a little higher up. "Pretty" to me feels like it's in-between "kind of" and "quite". "such a trouble" is maybe a little poetic? It could maybe work, but in that case I would say "It's such a trouble making a good..." But to sound more natural and casual, I'd say something like "it's [so/very] [hard/difficult] to make..." Also, very minor, but I usually contract "nickname" as one word.

Californication is a song of Red Hot Chili Paeppers. Californication is a song of Red Hot Chili Peppers.

Californication is a song ofby the Red Hot Chili Papers. Californication is a song by the Red Hot Chili Papers.

Songs are 'by' or 'from' someone.

Californication is a song ofby Red Hot Chili Paeppers. Californication is a song by Red Hot Chili Peppers.

Californication is a song ofby the Red Hot Chili Papers. Californication is a song by the Red Hot Chili Papers.

Californication is a song ofby the Red Hot Chili Paeppers. Californication is a song by the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

When talking about works of art, craft, inventions, etc; made by someone, we use "by" instead of "of". We don't always use "the", though: that's just for a band name like this. They're THE Red Hot Chili Peppers. I think "the" tends to get used before a band name when the name itself is something plural, as is the case here.

I suppose it’s a fake/fictitious word. I suppose it’s a fake/fictitious word.

Yes it is.

I suppose it’s a fake/fictitious (/ made up) word. I suppose it’s a fake/fictitious (/ made up) word.

"Made up" here has a level of intentionality that "fake" and "fictitious" don't, so I think it's a little more natural (just be careful, used in the wrong context, it can sound childish). An yeah, californication is an invented word. The main part of it is the "ation" sound which is used in words that indication transformation of some kind. But it's probably also intentional that fornication (a fancy word for sex) is in there too. I actually assumed the band had made it up, as most people associate it with the album and song of the same name, but apparently people were using it before that.

I suppose it’s a fake/fictitiousmade up word. I suppose it’s a made up word.

Like someone else has already mentioned, I would probably say "made up" in this context.

There is also a series of the same name, starring David Duchovny. There is also a series of the same name, starring David Duchovny.

I haven’t watched the series., I haven’t watched the series,

Connect this sentence to the next one with a comma to sound more fluent.

Aand I haven’don't known the lyrics of the song, tooeither – my English isn’t sothat good. and I don't know the lyrics of the song, either – my English isn’t that good.

- Connect this sentence to the last one with a comma to sound more fluent. - If you're writing a negative sentence, you should use "either" instead of "too."

And I haven’tdon't known the lyrics of the song, tooeither – my English isn’t sovery good. And I don't know the lyrics of the song, either – my English isn’t very good.

Present simple tense. It is a statement of fact. Negative of present simple uses do as an auxiliary to make the negative form.

And I haven’don't known the lyrics of the song, tooeither – my English isn’t so good. And I don't know the lyrics of the song, either – my English isn’t so good.

And I havedn’t known the lyrics of the song, too – my English isn’t so good. And I hadn’t known the lyrics of the song, too – my English isn’t so good.

And I haven’don't known the lyrics of the song, tooeither – my English isn’t so good. And I don't know the lyrics of the song, either – my English isn’t so good.

If we're talking in present tense and not past tense, I would say "I don't know..." instead of "I haven't known...". But if we're talking in past tense (that is, you didn't know before, but maybe now you do), I would say "I hadn't known..." It's difficult for me to describe, but "haven't known" feels odd in this context. The only context I can personally imagine it working in is if you have just recently re-learned something in the present moment. For instance, if someone learned to play piano very well at a young age, then forgot how to play going into adulthood, but then they picked it back up and got good again, they might say in that moment when they've realized they've just regained that skill, "I haven't known how to play like this for a long time." Though, notice that the above sentence "I haven't watched the series" works perfectly fine and is very natural. For some reason, "haven't" only feels weird to me when it's used with the verb "know". I'd recommend trying to find some resources about it online. Hopefully something out there can explain it better than I can. Also, when describing a list of NEGATIVE actions ("I haven't watched" and "I don't know"), I would recommend replacing "too" with "either" to sound more natural.

Californication iswould the process whenre people become like Californians, isn’t iright? Californication would the process where people become like Californians, right?

Since you thought this in the past, you were guessing at what Californication was. So you should use the hypothetical version of "is" which is "would be."

Californication iswould be the process whenre people become like Californians, isn’wouldn't it? Californication would be the process where people become like Californians, wouldn't it?

You assume that it means that, so you use "would" instead of "is"

Californication is thea process whenre people become like Californians, isn’t it? Californication is a process where people become like Californians, isn’t it?

But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, or irrigation – like a process whenre something getbecomes something anotherelse or covered with something anotherelse. But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, or irrigation – like a process where something becomes something else or covered with something else.

Instead of "something another," use "something else."

But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process when something gets something another or covered with something anotherelse. But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process when something gets covered with something else.

But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process whenre something getbecomes something anotherelse or covered with something anotherelse. But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process where something becomes something else or covered with something else.

Else is used when something is substituted

But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, or irrigation – like a process when something gets something another or covered with something another. But I used to think it was like galvanization, metalization or irrigation – like a process when something gets something another or covered with something another.

But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process when something gets turned into something anotherelse or covered with something anotherelse. But I used to think it was like galvanization, metallization, irrigation – like a process when something gets turned into something else or covered with something else.

"Something another" sounds a little bit like "something or other", which is an idiom that often takes the place of a noun and means the specific details of something aren't important or remembered. (Merriam Webster pulls this example sentence from Brian Truitt of USA TODAY: "People have been angry about something or other with this movie for two years now." What exactly are they angry about? I don't know, it's just something or other) In the case of "something another", I think what you mean is "something else". "Something another" sounds odd. But then, "something gets something else" implies that "something else" is becoming the possession of "something". "Get", by itself, doesn't carry the meaning of transforming into something. Instead, I would say "turns into", or maybe even "gets turned into." Although, if we remove the "gets", then we'd have to add it back in before "covered": "...something turns into something else or gets covered with something else."

I've just glanced at the lyrics and a few translations just now. I've just glanced at the lyrics and a few translations now.

Using a present perfect – "I've [just] glanced" – instead of regular past tense can further emphasize that this is something that JUST happened in the very recent past.

It’s turned out it ratheractually means addiction or temptation. It’s turned out it actually means addiction or temptation.

It’s turneds out it rather means addiction or temptation. It’s turns out it means addiction or temptation.

Probably better to use present tense again here.

It’sRather, it turned out it ratherto means addiction or temptation. Rather, it turned out to mean addiction or temptation.

It’s turned out it rather means addiction or temptation. It turned out it rather means addiction or temptation.

I think it's a bit of both. California is know for having lots of drugs.

It’s turneds out it ratheractually means addiction or temptation. It turns out it actually means addiction or temptation.

"It's turned out" is kind of an odd thing to say. For past tense, we'd omit the " 's" to say "it turned out", for talking about something we realized in the past (maybe while telling a story). But for present tense, as is probably the case here, we'd say "it turns out". For instance: "I just googled it, and it turns out this guy's done a lot more than just make a couple board games!" Also, in this context, I would say "actually" instead of "rather". "Rather" isn't really that wrong, but it feels a little weird, and "actually" is a bit more natural here. "Rather" works better when the two things being compared are close together, like: "It does not mean to become like Californians, but rather, addiction or temptation".

Should I learn it more carefully? Should I learn it more carefully?

I'm not sure what you mean here.

Should I learnstudy it more carefully? Should I study it more carefully?

'study' is better here sounds like you are making a conscious effort.

Should I learnanalyze it more carefully? Should I analyze it more carefully?

Analyze seems to be the better verb here

Should I learn it(the lyrics / the meaning) more carefully? Should I learn (the lyrics / the meaning) more carefully?

"it" is ambiguous here, better to specify

But later I knewlearnt that there’s such an English word as fornication. But later I learnt that there’s such an English word as fornication.

You've found something out you didn't know before so 'to learn' is a better verb here.

But later I klearnewd that there’s such an English word as , "fornication". But later I learned that there’s an English word, "fornication".

But later, I klearnewd that there’s such an English word as fornication. But later, I learned that there’s such an English word as fornication.

But later I knewfound out that there’s such an English word as "fornication". But later I found out that there’s an English word "fornication".

"found out" is a bit more natural for emphasising going from "not knowing" to "knowing".

But later I klearnewd that there’s such an English word as fornication. But later I learned that there’s such an English word as fornication.

Not wrong, but an alternative way of saying the latter half could be: "...that there's the English word 'fornication'".

The word is a bit archaic and I wonder didif the girl knoew about the meaning?. The word is a bit archaic and I wonder if the girl knew the meaning.

The word is a bit archaic, and I wonder, did the girl know about the meaning? The word is a bit archaic, and I wonder, did the girl know the meaning?

The word is a bit archaic andbut I wonder did the girl know about the meaning? The word is a bit archaic but I wonder did the girl know about the meaning?

If she was a native English speaking adult, she knew.

The word is a bit archaic and I'm wondering: did the girl know about theits meaning? The word is a bit archaic and I'm wondering: did the girl know about its meaning?

Another alternate correction: "The word is a bit archaic, so I wonder: does the girl know about its meaning?"

Do you know it? Do you know it?