Ok, here's one I was thinking about last night on the way home. In every language there are a handful of verbs that are not very specific, verbs that don't indicate any particular action. "Walk", "sleep", "eat", those have explicit meanings (even though we may shift them around as needed). But in English words like "do", "make", "have" and so forth are much more general:
I have a dream, or a vision.
I do the laundry but I make dinner (and sometimes my bed).
I do my job, and I do someone a favor.
I make a promise, a face, and a friend; in another sense I make it go faster.
I make out a will.
I take a nap, and your temperature.
I wreak destruction.
You may object that this is nothing new, that English is full of verbs with shifting meanings, and what can you be thinking, Bob? But I'm talking about something more specific here: All the above phrases can be said more precisely—I dream a vision, I wash the laundry and so on—but the verbs I actually named above don't mean any of those specific things, they're just general "do" verbs, even the one about the will, in that case. And here's the thing: You simply can't do a dream, or make a favor, or take a promise or have your temperature; we have very firm notions on which verbs work for each of the nouns that we "do".
And of course in other languages they have completely different ideas. In Spanish or Swedish maybe you can do a will but you would never do a job; no, you work your job, but you would never "work" a miracle (it just sounds silly!, they'd complain). And "have" a dream? That doesn't even say anything!
Endlessly fascinating.
For a teacher of English as a second language, I can say this is often an interesting divergence in language concepts. Most of my students in my long ago years were Spanish speakers, and, in Spanish, they have the same "general" verbs, but attach them to different things than we. The verbs tener (to have) and hacer (to do, to make, some other meanings that don't translate well) are as flexible as our equivalent verbs, but the verbs are often attached to different objects, phrases, etc. So, for example, if I said tengo hambre, I would mean that "I am hungry." But the "exact" (if you can call any translation that) meaning would be "I have hunger (hungry)." It makes for difficulties, sure, in learning the other language, but it also should point out the sort-of strange equivalence when a Mexican immigrant says, in English, "I have hungry," and when an English speaker in Juarez (if there are any there right now — seriously, don't go there) says "Estoy hambre." They're both interestingly, and maybe a bit endearingly, incorrect. The best part is, though, that the audience to each will still understand the sentiment. And, if you're lucky, feed you.
You're an ESL teacher, tunawrites? I have wanted to do that for years! I eventually decided I'd have to wait until I retire (yeah, right, someday), but maybe I could volunteer at the local library for one evening a week.
I was an ESL teacher for many years, at first part-time, then full-time, then part-time evenings, both for children in elementary school and for adults at a community college. When I went to law school I continued to tutor ESL for our foreign students in the LL.M. program at the school; those students were at a much higher level than the students I had previously taught, though. I've continued to teach or tutor on a volunteer basis, though right now I am not teaching at all.
I highly recommend it, and if you do it as a volunteer it is probably not that difficult to find a gig somewhere, depending on where you live, I would suppose. For all the English I thought I knew as an English major, a writer, and an editor, I don't think I ever learned more than when I was teaching basic English to speakers of other languages. As the teacher, I always wanted to have the answers to any questions the students may have had, and it's amazing the tiny nuances of the most basic English that we generally stop thinking about after we learn it in elementary school (that said, I may have gotten a little too wonky at times, but I don't think I lost too many of the students when I did). Also, I have taught remedial English for GED programs, which offers some similar insights, but it does not compare to the enthusiasm and sheer joy of learning I felt from many of my basic ESL students. They would always tell me how thrilled they were to use something they learned in class when they were out in the community, and it was always inspiring to hear how glad they were to be learning. So, in sum, I think you would get great joy and have some of your own learning experiences if you found a class you could teach. I know I miss it when I'm not doing it.
I guess I never thought of it before, but I see now that I did do it once, briefly. I said I had a bunch of Iranian friends in college, and we often spent time discussing why we do certain things in English. But yeah, I think I want to do it again some time.