Thread: I'm trying to write a fiction book in English. Just for fun :)

When Ann told Peter the date he closed his eyes thinking ‘Oh my… It looks like I died in my time, in 2014 and my body and soul appeared somehow here in Belarus Soviet Union, in 1941.

He pinched his forearm to make sure he wasn’t dreaming and the immediate pain told him he wasn’t.

I know. Articles were invented by God in punishment for out sins

‘I must immediately go to the consulate see the consul,’

Plot:

‘I’m afraid you can’t make it there right now,’ Ann said, ‘there isn’t any transport here in the village at moment and it’s about 70 miles over 100 km to Minsk from here. You will have to wait for a truck or something passing by that can give you a lift.’

Surely, they have horses at least. No way they live there completely isolated.

Plot:

‘What about you?’ Peter asked, ‘Considering the bombers flying overhead, the border frontline is in a stone’s throw, the Germans can get here in a week or so. When will you evacuate?’

You must keep in mind that Peter KNOWS what would happen. Minsk was overrun by the Germans by June, 28th. They don't know anything yet. Considering the pre-war propaganda the oncoming war should have been swift and take place on enemy's territory.
Rephrase:
‘What about you?’ Peter asked, ‘Look at those bombers, the Germans will be here within a week! You HAVE to leave immediately!’

Always keep in mind that Peter knows what would soon happen. At least in general terms.

I will not evacuate leave at all I'm not going to leave,’ she replied with a frozen face, ‘I will stay here.’

‘Most of these people will not leave,’ Ann said, nodding at old Nikolai and his wife, ‘there are many civilians here and the authorities can’t evacuate all of them. They will have to stay here, so will their kids. I can’t leave my children.’

Не верю! (с) People are scared and worried. They don't know what to do. In the first days of the war there was total chaos, especially among the civilians (army too, by the way). Generally, many of them didn't even know what's going on. I don't think such a deadset resolve was possible on that day. Besides, the first thing people usually take care of is the safety of women and children. No matter what - there should be a Communist party commisar somewhere about to explain things. Note that the party was called ВКП(б) Всесоюзная Коммунистическая Партия большевиков, not KПСС.

There was something weird in what was going on, in this weak little woman who was going to fight till the end for herself and for a handful of kids while he, the a strong man the defender who supposed to be defending them, was just going to flee and hide behind the thick walls of the consulate

‘Foreigners, heh! And just who the hell then I am?’ he thought,

‘Why the God or whoever played this mean joke slipped me into this place?’,

Should I immediately run away now or should I stay and (try to) help these people?’

Where would he run? Back into the woods? No transport - you said this yourself. He might even consider surrendering to the Germans. They weren't at war with USA, but sill Peter had to prove he was indeed an American to them. I'd say he had no choice at this time.

‘What if my destiny is to stay here and prove something as atonement in redemption for (to redeem) my old life?’

Still, I don't quite understand what were the deadly sins he committed in his old life that he wanted to redeem himself for so badly? You should put some bigger skeletons in his closet.

These were questions without answers. Peter virtually heard the sarcastic voice in his head: ‘You were asking for challenges? There you go man’.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but this time I don't feel like applying your suggestions

You must keep in mind that Peter KNOWS what would happen. Minsk was overrun by the Germans by June, 28th.

No he doesn't.
Ask an average the Americans what happened then and you'll hear all sorts of fantastic versions, if not "umm I dunno".

Always keep in mind that Peter knows what would soon happen. At least in general terms.

Same as above.

frontline

Maaan, they have no idea about the "front line" they still think it's a border. Even in fact there wasn't any "front line", the germans just pierced the border at a number of locations at once and went further leaving the Russian troops in encirclement. They didn't give a damn about local resistance. They just pierced the line and went further like a needle of a syringe wents in a biological cell in those old photos.

Besides, the first thing people usually take care of is the safety of women and children.

C'mon! The first thing to be evacuated are "values" and families of big cheeses
Even that wasn't completely done in our history, because, you were correct, by 28th they encircled Minsk and moved slightly further to the East.

You should put some bigger skeletons in his closet.

Hmm, I guess I should put it more clearly somewhere at the beginning. He was supposed to feel lost (all alone), guilty (no children), and stuff. Totally depressed.

As for the other corrections I think it's a matter of style, not grammar and now I would like to retain my own unless it sounds awkward/reads bad/ungrammatical to native speakers. Sorry.

He should have at least general knowledge. He's 60, born in early 1950s. People of that time are generally more intelligent.
As for the rest - try to keep the known facts straight. Also I din't question your style as much as I questioned the plot inconsistencies (like the one with the date on the three months old newspaper), some words that you used incorrectly or the necessary details you omitted (like clothes). Anyway, if you wish I can stick to grammar only.

A side note. When you are in question about which word to choose - always use a monolingual dictionary. Then check with Google about how many hits that word has (you can pick a word only several geeks are aware of) and also look for usage examples (search through parallel texts). I know, I translated a book once (here on this forum, by the way) and made many of your mistakes as well.

Ok, Ramil.
I do need suggestions about the plot, style and wording as well, it's just that there is a difference between when I misuse something and when there are better options. The former is quite ok, I see it and I correct it without objections. As for the latter I try (at least I try) to estimate to understand the difference and if I see your thing is better than mine then I give it a go. If I don't see it, I don't use it either. Simple like that. So please do correct me, no matter whether I apply all of your corrections or just some of them.

A more elaborate explanation why I didn't use your suggestions:

appeared somehow here in Belarus Soviet Union, in 1941.

Gonna use it

and the immediate pain told him he wasn’t.

Gonna remove the 'immediate' and leave only "the pain".
The pain is because he knows the source of the pain.
I know that you know. It's Basics.
I'm definitely overusing the word 'immediate(ly)' -- trying to struggle with it.

village at moment and it’s about 70 miles over 100 km to Minsk

No way. It'll be miles. Peter is American and she just tried not to puzzle him with calculations.

hey have horses at least.

Yup but I don't think someone would lend him one. They'd find a thousand excuses instead.

the border frontline is in a stone’s throw

already explained

keep in mind that Peter KNOWS what would happen.

He doesn't. Explained. I don't believe in the overall knowledge. Sorry, but it's just that.

Considering the pre-war propaganda the oncoming war should have been swift and take place on enemy's territory.

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe particularly true. Many people had connections with polish relatives, friends etc, and when the german troops were accumulating on the Polish territory, I'm sorry but I don't believe there weren't rumors about it.

‘What about you?’ Peter asked, ‘Look at those bombers, the Germans will be here within a week! You HAVE to leave immediately!’

Maybe. I'll think about it.

Always keep in mind that Peter knows what would soon happen. At least in general terms.

Ok, I'll try to stick with it wherever possible.

I will not evacuate leave at all I'm not going to leave

Peter used this word. Word used correctly. Why should she change it?

In the first days of the war there was total chaos

Someone smart would know that or at least could guess. I pretend that she was smart Just my choice.

in this weak little woman who was going to fight till the end

is the selected piece really necessary? Why? If someone else seconds your point I'll correct it right away.

while he, the a strong man

'the' is an exaggeration here. I think it's ok. If someone else tells me it reads bad, same story.

strong man the defender who supposed to be defending them

1. who was supposed...
2. the defender is another exaggeration
3. the "if someone else-thing".

‘Foreigners, heh! And just who the hell then I am?’ he thought,

Not sure it's better.

‘Why the God or whoever played this mean joke

I thought God could be referred either way, with or without the article. As a proper noun, like a name, or just like a noun. Like a job position.

Should I immediately run away now or should I stay

Great. Gonna use it. This 'immediately' again.

or should I stay and (try to) help these people?

Well, maybe. I'm not sure yet. Probably I'll use it as well.

Where would he run? Back into the woods? No transport - you said this yourself.

Yeah, right. I'm trying to make a point about him deciding if he wants to continue on the attempts to leave or not. Not to really "leave".

and prove something as atonement in redemption for (to redeem) my old life?

Not sure.

These were questions without answers. Peter virtually heard the sarcastic voice in his head:

These were -- I intentionally omitted them. "If someone else....you know"
the voice -- whose voice? He doesn't know that. He doesn't know the owner of the voice. Why 'the' then?

------

Sorta like that.

Originally Posted by Medved

No way. It'll be miles. Peter is American and she just tried not to puzzle him with calculations.

She must be really smart in order to mentally divide the distance in kilometers by 1.6 on the fly. I needed a calculator, to be honest. Besides, all those little details about the US measure system were far less known these days. There was no internet

Yup but I don't think someone would lend him one. They'd find a thousand excuses instead.

Say so then. Don't tell there was no transportation.

He doesn't. Explained. I don't believe in the overall knowledge. Sorry, but it's just that.

He knew at least that there WAS a war. A quite bloody one and Peter was born not long after it had ended. Same with the frontline - he knew there would be a frontline.
Anyway - it's YOUR story, I just want to explain my point.

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe particularly true. Many people had connections with polish relatives, friends etc, and when the german troops were accumulating on the Polish territory, I'm sorry but I don't believe there weren't rumors about it.

A bit of info about pre-war German-Soviet relations:
We had a non-agression pact. Poland was invaded not only by the Germans, but also by Soviet Union according by the infamous secret addendum to it. German troops massed in Poland was no surprise all things considered, besides there were no spy satellites, no spy planes. It was quite difficult to assess the real magnitude of the force that has been stationed near the borders. Spies did their work, but Stalin simply refused to believe in their reports. (Richard Sorge's story is quite illustrative). All who were spreading 'rumors' about the oncoming German aggression were considered provocators and dealt with quite abruptly. The border itself was locked. No contacts were possible. I mean it. Quite the opposite - we were actually 'friends' with the Germans.

Again - all I am telling you about is provided just for your information. You can deal with it as you see fit.

Peter used this word. Word used correctly. Why should she change it?

Perhaps, he's from our time, after all. He could use this word. But Ann should be surprised to hear that. She still might have believed that the Red Army would get rid of the invaders in a matter of weeks. That's what she'd been constantly told by the authorities. The disillusionment would come later.

n this weak little woman who was going to fight till the end
is the selected piece really necessary? Why? If someone else seconds your point I'll correct it right away.

Simple grammar:
to be going to do smth.
Here, you can't omit the 'to be' part

'the' is an exaggeration here. I think it's ok. If someone else tells me it reads bad, same story.

Well, I'm not the native English speaker, but personally I think this is simply bad grammar, not an exaggerration. Putting 'the' here would mean he was the ONLY strong man in the vicinity.

2. the defender is another exaggeration

You have some very odd views on how the exaggerrations are expressed in English.

and prove something as atonement in redemption for (to redeem) my old life?

Not sure.

Well, I'm sure in this one. Redemption is the right word here. 100% guarantee. (follow my advice and google the word usage).

the voice -- whose voice? He doesn't know that. He doesn't know the owner of the voice. Why 'the' then?

Well, this I can agree with. You can use both. But since it was the ONLY voice in HIS head... well, I thought 'the' would be more appropriate.

P.S.
Generally - Peter is not only from the future - he's an old man in spite of his new young body. He's 60, not 25. He's experienced and knows much of life (at least that's what he thinks he does ). It would be unfair if he would act as dumb as a young man would.

in redemption for

Done

Say so then. Don't tell there was no transportation.

Done

Adding a new piece of the story, a spicy one, I'll update the whole thing by morning.

Ask an average the Americans what happened then and you'll hear all sorts of fantastic versions, if not "umm I dunno".

Absolutely true -- a well-educated American of Peter's age would most likely recognize "7 December, 1941" as the day that Pearl Harbor was bombed (everyone's heard sound-clips of FDR's "a day that will live in infamy" speech!). But "22 June, 1941" would have no immediate significance for him. He might also remember that Americans landed at Normandy sometime in June 1944, and that Germany formally surrendered in May 1945, and Japan in August 1945 -- but he probably wouldn't know any specific dates of major battles between Germany and the USSR.

It might be a funny (and realistic) detail to have Peter remembering to himself "that movie I saw a few years ago about a German sniper and a Russian sniper, played by what's-his-face, Jude something... it was during the siege of Stalingrad -- or was it the siege of Leningrad? -- no, wait, Stalingrad and Leningrad were actually the same city, but they renamed it during the war -- was that right? It sounded right, he was almost 90% sure..."

Related to this: as has been pointed out, Ann seems oddly unsuspicious at finding an American in rural Belarus! Even allowing that Ann, by nature, is not a stereotypical sovok who's paranoid of foreign spies -- in fact, she's very curious and open-minded about foreigners, which is why she worked so hard to learn English -- in 1941 her first thought should've been "How do I know he's not a German?" And her second thought, perhaps: "Or how do I know he's not an NKVD agent trying to test me, to see if I'm a traitor?"

So it might be worthwhile to write a few more paragraphs of dialogue between Ann and Peter in which she is trying to figure out if he's a German, while he tries to persuade her that he's NOT German! Of course, his strange comment about "Mr. Barack Obama" would, on the one hand, cause her puzzlement, but on the other hand, would give her some reassurance that he was neither a Nazi spy nor an NKVD officer!

P.S. Another thought for you to consider: if Ann (or others) were to discover that Peter is from the future (and assuming that they believed this to be the truth), naturally they'd expect that he could give them information to help them win the war -- or maybe he knows how to build some sort of futuristic weapon, right? But, of course, from Peter's POV, he really has no useful info to offer; he's not a research physicist, and he doesn't know the specific details of Hitler's invasion of the USSR, so he could only tell them, unhelpfully, that "I know that you'll eventually drive out the Germans, and then Hitler will suck on a bullet, about four years from now..."

I remember once reading a sci-fi story in which 22nd-century scientists build a working time machine, and they somehow manage to "capture" a 32nd-century man and bring him back to their time. The guy from the future is only mildly surprised at suddenly finding himself a thousand years in the past (evidently time-machines exist in his era, but only the super-rich can afford to use them), and is mostly delighted by how primitive everything is, as though he's a tourist at a Renaissance Faire. "Oh my gosh, so this is what life was like a thousand years ago... no transporter beams, no antigravity clothing, no telekinesis helmets, no faster-than-light spaceships! It's all so quaint!"

Of course, the 22nd-century scientists are eager to hear more about all these technological marvels, and how to build them -- but how the hell should he know? He's not an engineer or scientist, he's just a middle manager in the accounting department of an insurance company in one of the less-fashionable cities on Mars...

I think it's a matter of style, not grammar and now I would like to retain my own unless it sounds awkward/reads bad/ungrammatical to native speakers.

Молодец! That's the right attitude to take, Medved.

Up to now I've only been talking about "storytelling" points and haven't paid attention to any language problems, but later tonight I'll take another read through and look for any errors that are serious enough to require changing. The only one I can think of now, off the top of my head, is that after Ann mentions her newspapers in English, Peter should say "Can you bring them with you when you come to see me tomorrow?", not "Can you take them with you...?" (NB: Generally, "bring" belongs with "come" and "take" belongs with "go".)

Oh, also: you had originally written "everything shed the spirit of antiquity". This doesn't work in English, but I'm curious to know whether it's a direct translation of a Russian idiom?

Anyway, the most normal/neutral construction, IMHO, would be "everything had an air of antiquity". You could also say "everything exuded antiquity" or "everything radiated antiquity", etc.

However, antiquity usually implies the remote eras of Moses, Socrates, Julius Caesar, etc. And I suppose someone as "recent" as Владимир Святославич could also be said to belong to antiquity. But the word really doesn't fit with such "modern" technologies as the kerosene lamp mentioned in the story! A kerosene lamp may "look antique," but it doesn't "have an air of antiquity."

My suggestion for the sentence:

All these candles, the kerosene lamp, the rough wooden furniture, even the clothes -- they all had an antique feel, like something out of Little-House-on-the-Prairie.

The Little House on the Prairie books for children have been in print since the 1930s and inspired a very popular TV series in the '70s and '80s, so it would be completely natural for an American man of Peter's generation to be reminded of it when he saw the kerosene lamp, etc.

Mainly I focused on corrections to Peter's dialogue (both spoken and internal), since it's important that (a) he should SOUND like an American from 2014, in his grammar and word-usage; and (b) he should REACT and THINK like an American from 2014.
For example, an American from 2014 would find Ann's use of the "obsolete" phrase Soviet Union to be much more odd than the word Belarus -- so I changed the dialogue a little to reflect this.

I also had a suggestion about the miles/kilometers problem that Ramil brought up. Americans who jog/run as an amateur sport are really quite accustomed to using "kilometers" for long-distance races -- even though they invariably use "miles" when driving in cars! And we say things like "How many grams of fat in a half-pound of butter?". And we buy milk by the half-gallon, but Cola-Cola comes in 2-liter bottles, etc. In short, Americans do find it natural to use metric units SOMETIMES, but only in certain specific contexts.

‘You are in the Soviet Union -- Belarus,' she said with a slight accent.

‘Oh god, Belarus. I can’t believe it.’ 'The Soviet Union? I can't believe it,' he said aloud, while thinking to himself: 'Did she really say Soviet Union?! Oh, great, just my luck -- I meet a beautiful foreign woman who speaks English, but she's some kind of political fanatic who's still fighting the Cold War in her head!'

‘What’s wrong?’ she asked.

‘Nothing, sorry,’ he said, thinking: ‘Everything’s wrong! Yesterday I was at home on the other side of the globe and now I’m here in the middle of nowhere and I don’t know how I got here and how to get out’.

Almost as if reading his mind, Ann laughed: 'Don't worry, it's not as if you're lost in the middle of Amazon jungle! True, it's a quite small village, but we're only about 110 kilometers due North from Minsk.'

'I'm not exactly sure how far that is in miles,' she added apologetically, after a short pause.

Like most Americans, Peter used the metric system only when absolutely necessary. But since he had run quite a few "10-K mini-marathons" in his younger years -- the doctors had recommended jogging as physical therapy after the accident -- he had no trouble doing this conversion in his head. '110 kilometers would be something like 70 miles, give or take,' he explained. 'So that should be only about an hour's drive by car.'

Of course, an American from 2014 would have no idea of the road conditions in rural Belarus back in 1941 -- so traveling 110 km in one hour would seem reasonable to Peter!

The old man told said something to Ann...

Oddly enough, it would also be fine to say "he told Ann something" or "he told the story to Ann," but "he told something to Ann" sounds very awkward. And "he said Ann something" or "he said Ann the story" or "he said the story to Ann" are all impossible, but "he told Ann the story" is fine. So the word-order is heavily dependent on the choice of words.

‘United States, ma’am,’ he replied, thinking to himself: ‘It looks like the interrogation began is starting sooner than I expected. It had to happen sooner or later. it must have happened.’

‘Can you take bring them with you when you come to see me tomorrow, would you?’

'I see,’ Peter drawled said slowly as a thought stroke across struck his mind

To me, saying "drawled" in this particular context would make it sound like Peter was sarcastically pretending to be simple-minded (as though he's an atheist rudely mocking her belief in "divine providence").

Nikolai told Peter to follow him, at least that’s how Peter interpreted the abracadabra he said [b]gobbledygook he spoke[/s]

Note that in English, turkeys say "gobble-gobble" -- and domestic turkeys (but not the wild ones) are stereotypically thought to be the stupidest of all birds. So this is probably where the Americanism "gobbledygook" comes from.

Nikolai took out of the old frayed scarred cupboard

The word "frayed" is really only used with soft, fibrous materials such as rope, thread, fabric, clothing, etc. -- not with items made of wood. For things made of metal, "dented" is often the best choice. "Scarred" or "battered" are appropriate for an old wooden cupboard, although you could say "splintery" for wooden furniture that has been FRESHLY damaged.

Considering the bombers flying overhead, the border has got to be is in a stone’s throw away ... When will you are you going to evacuate?

There's no preposition "in" in the expression "to be a stone's throw away"; "has got to be" sounds more natural here than "is"; and expressing the simple-future tense with "going to" instead of "will" helps to emphasize the urgency here. (If you like, you can also replace "got to" with "gotta" and "going to" with "gonna" -- although since Peter knows that English isn't Ann's first language, he might naturally speak to her a little more carefully.)

This is what the regular army should do, not you.’

You might also consider changing "army" to "army or navy" -- it would subtly hint that Peter doesn't know Belarus's geography, and therefore has no idea how far they are from the seacoast, where the navy (and/or marine infantry) would operate.

[QUOTE]‘What if they WILL DO treat the civilians bad?’ Peter asked looking in Ann’s eyes.

By strict rules of grammar, one should say "badly" here, not "bad." But under the circumstances, "bad" sounds perfectly normal from a native speaker (although informal). However, "will" is simply not possible here, and one must say "do". (However, in Ann's sentence before this, both "will not" and "do not" are correct, and in fact there's very little difference in meaning: "I hope the Germans don't/won't treat the civilians real bad.")

‘Foreigners; who the hell then I am I, then?’ he thought,

You could also put "then" at the beginning of the clause: "then who the hell am I?", with no need for a comma.

‘Why [b]did[b] God or whoever played this mean joke slipped by slipping me into this place?’,

The above changes in the verb forms are essential. But I might also suggest "Why did God, or some kind of genie, or freaking space-aliens, or whoever it was, play..." (to emphasize Peter's theological uncertainty at this point -- he only knows that something paranormal is involved!). And although the verb "to slip" is correct, it sounds slightly textbook-ish here -- I would recommend "to stick" as more natural.

‘There are is not a single clock at in this house

...I saw camerade comrade Somoff...

As is often the case, the English spelling is inconsistent: "They felt a sense of camaraderie with their comrades" -- although both words come from the same French origin!

Somoff? Who is it that?

"Who is it?" would be the normal question if Somoff (or someone else) were knocking at the door.

There were a dozen of soldiers in the truck's bed with strange tommy-guns (semi-)automatic rifles in their hands

"A dozen soldiers" but "Dozens of soldiers" -- take your pick.

The term "tommy-guns" sounds rather old-fashioned -- an actual American soldier from 1941 might have used it, but not a time-traveler from 2014!

Because it was mentioned early in the story that Peter has some experience as a hunter, I assume that he would probably know the difference between a "pistol" and a "rifle" and a "machine gun", or between a "semi-automatic" and "automatic," etc. If you want to emphasize that Peter is ignorant of firearms, however, I would change "tommy guns" to the incorrect "machine guns" -- which is quite a common mistake. Or you can simply say "strange guns," without being more specific.

...in a uniform similar to the sergeant’s... Sergeant Somoff answered and all of a sudden...

Throughout this whole paragraph, there should be a "the" before "sergeant," unless "Sergeant" (capitalized) is used as a title before a surname such as "Somoff."

only by chance not torn tearing it off the old rusty hinges

seemingly still absent-minded in a daze

"Absent-minded" suggests the meaning "slightly forgetful" or "not quite paying close attention," etc. -- not that someone is nearly catatonic from shock.

whispered ‘It’s empty, move get into it’.

just grabbed her, lifted her (up) and slid her into the barrel

Repeating the pronoun "her" sounds better here. And to me, "lift up" provides a better rhythm here than "lift" alone, but the "up" isn't required by grammar.

‘Wasn’t that barrel empty?’ he was a little scared ... ‘What was in there?’

‘Mushrooms’, she said, fixing up her hair. ‘Pickled.’

This line from Ann was delightfully written! I just thought that it sounded even better with a full-stop and a capital "P", therefore breaking it into two separate (and amusingly laconic!) sentences.

I look forward to reading more -- it's a really fun story!

Thanks, Throbert!
It looks like tomorrow I've got a hell of a lot of things to correct
(Actually I expected that there were MUCH more to be corrected)
And yes, I'll definitely keep on writing, it's fun and by the way, when I write I naturally feel that all my passive vocab is stirring somewhere in the brains trying to work its way out
Sometimes I recall words I would never expect that I ALREADY know them.
Thanks again, see you.

those bombers woke us up in the twilight at dawn

twi·light noun, often attributive \ˈtwī-ˌlīt\
: the light from the sky at the end of the day when night is just beginning
: the period when day is ending and night is beginning
: a period when something is ending

The policeman wore a (service) cap with a cornflower-blue frock

frock? I think this is called 'crown' (тулья).

with strange tommy-guns in hands

I should probably mention that submachine guns weren't very common. Soldiers were armed mostly with Mosin's rifles.

Grammar here (no subject, wrong word order, wrong tense):

Peter yanked it open; (subject? he) only by chance (did) not torn tear it off the old rusty hinges

He did not tear it off the rusty hinges purely by chance.
or:
Peter yanked it open nearly tearing the rusty hinges off.

Choice of words:

he quickly banged it shut

'Bang' comes with a very loud noise. Peter did not want to be heard so he should have done it quietly.

seemingly still absent-minded

... still in shock.

Grammar (this worked most of the time - just Past indefinite):

he saw in a movie that a slap in the face had worked in this way

She awkwardly tried to crawl into the barrel. That She was so very slow that Peter just grabbed her

Grammar (no subject):

He covered the barrel with a bunch of rags (subject?) found here in the pantry

either 'he found here' or 'which were lying here"

Plot:

When he heard the street-door open he just kneeled, squeezed himself in another corner and also covered with the remaining rags

So many rags. I'm trying to think why would anyone store rags in a pantry?

Quieted down, he was sitting sat there in the corner watching through a small hole he left in his cover.

The man finished the inspection and went out not bothered bothering with closing the door.

However, they kept sitting in silence for yet another ten minutes

Consider rephrasing:

her shoes were soaking with liquid with tiny pieces of something stuck all around.

‘Wasn’t that it empty?’

Plot:

‘Mushrooms’

50 gallons of mushrooms!? Well, ok. I wonder how long it takes to pick so many. Besides, you'll get poisoned if you try to eat them anyway. When you pickle something the container is supposed to be hermetically sealed.

Peter chuckled and took a quick look out of the pantry

... cautiously peered out of the pantry door.

took a sit in the middle of the room

on the floor?

Choice of words:

‘you can give us away with the heaving movement.

to heave means lift, raise, elevate, to rise and fall (like a wave).

Their group are one of the pioneers advance parties

‘I got it, go on.’ he said pensively.

pensive = musingly or dreamingly thoughtful. Just thoughtfully will be better. He's not very melancholic right now, quite the opposite probably.

they have found the a Russian soldier at in the village

Better split this sentence in two:

Peter never had served in the army, he wasn’t a special forces officer. He wasn’t a martial arts master either.

What do you mean here?

fights with other terrors like him

because contemporary business world obeys follows the same cruel rules

Inconsistency:

and rushed to the main room

I thought they already were in it.

a couple of pretty crappy knives

Pretty crappy? LOL.

and crouched out the door.

He did what? Crawled maybe? crawled out of the door?

Peter found a place off the view out of sight of both the guy and the girl and sat there

Plot:

He caught an appropriate moment, jumped on the guy, covered his mouth with a hand, yanked the guy’s jaw up to open the neck and cut it open, still holding him tight in a grip with both hands and legs crossed round the guy’s waist to prevent him from either screaming or moving.

... and now the whole village's going to be killed as soon as somebody misses him.

Peter covered her with her rags , grasped by the hands and dragged to into the house.

Rags again? Clothes maybe?

Having done with the girl he turned to Ann:

Not done, that sounds as if he did something permanent to her . Say something like 'He gently laid the girl onto the floor and turned to Ann'

Ann nodded and the last thing he saw leaving was the same thing he had been doing to her an hour ago before: she was slapping the girl in the cheeks.

A whole hour had passed? I thought it was merely several minutes.

Rephrase:

Peter came over to the body and started to look through his belongings sorting them

Not Peter's belongings, but the belongings of the dead soldier.

a water bottle a flast of water, something looking like a first aid kit, the boots

a flask or water. Certainly it wasn't a bottle.

I just don't understand this sentence:

He just bunched the things together on the clean side of the guy’s shirt, rolled it up

The only 'clean side' of the shirt would be the back one. Rolled what up? The shirt? Whatever for?

By the time he returned Ann had managed to bring the girl round to her senses, they had even found some clothes and now were sitting on the bench and talking. When he came in Ann said ‘We’re ready to go’, but suddenly added: ‘wait, I’ll get you some clothes’.

A minor notice. Consider changing 'talking' with 'sitting on the bench with Ann trying to comfort her.

Plot:

trying to find a bag or something to keep his new stuff. He was done had finished packing just before Ann came with the clothes.

What did he find finally?

He briefly examined the tommy-gun submachine gun and suddenly realized that he had no idea on how to use it.

If you want to stress out the fact that Peter calls it so because it bears some semblance to the real tommy-gun then put it in quotes 'Tommy-gun'
Although, it was unlikely those soldiers had PPShs. It should be Mosin's rifle or a Mauser (German).

‘I don’t, wait I’ll ask Dasha’, she said.

Plot:

The girls were chatting for less than a minute, then Ann said ‘Yes, she knows. She is married to an officer and she has seen many times how to shoot and reload when they livied at the military camp.

Hmm, not very believable, but it's your story. Don't you think that some description of how Dasha looked might be in order. How old is she, what's her hair color (oh, almost forgot - I don't know what's Ann's hair color also).

‘Okay, better than nothing; I think guess she’ll have to teach me,’ Peter said slightly embarrassed by the fact that he has to learn from a girl how to shoot a gun.

Some other thing: where's Dasha's husband? Did she wordlessly agreed to follow them? Didn't she at least ask just who the hell was this foreigner who'd just killed a man who tried rape her?
I think she could say at least 'thank you'.

‘Not a problem,’ Ann said, ‘When we stop for a stand she will teach you.’

Stand? What do you mean?

By the way - where are they going? Shouldn't they discuss it?

oh, ok. I'll continue later.

Ramil, thanks! Great!
Ill work through both yours and Throbert's soon.

Now:

I should probably mention that submachine guns weren't very common. Soldiers were armed mostly with Mosin's rifles.

Yes, I agree. Historically it's true. It's my own fiction because I decided to arm Peter with a submachine gun rather than a rifle. And also even despite the reality I think it would be a much better idea for the Germans to arm the terrorists/saboteurs with submachine guns because they are much more efficient at closer distances.

I think Peter should be British - your style of writing is more British than American! I can tell you've been reading English literature. (I live in the UK). Peter has a kind of British feel to him.

And I still think it's almost impossible that there was an American consulate in Minsk. You really have to check it!
I think all countries just had embassies in Moscow.

Превед Медвед!

I agree with all the comments praising your amazing writing. I've read a bit and want to carry on.

From a linguistic point of view, there are some mistakes and sometimes I sense that you're using Russian sentence structures. Also, some of the vocabulary is just slightly "off target". For example, in the first sentence you use "thick bush". I don't know where Peter is at this point. If he is in Australia or Africa, "bush" would be the appropriate word, but in Europe or America it wouldn't be right - you'd need to use another expression, such as "dense thickets".

You're clearly a really talented linguist. My advice is to immerse yourself in English - watch as many films/tv programmes in it as you can. Try to speak it as much as you can. This way, you'll get a feeling for which words to use and how to express your thoughts in a way which is more "authentic".

Thanks edvalais!
It's really amazing to work in collaboration with all of you guys!
Yes, sometimes I do have the feeling that my wording is at least 'far from perfection'
That's why I need your help, it's like another sort of learning the language. It helps me activate my vocabulary, learn new words, set phrases and idioms from your comments and corrections and also get a grip on composing sentences in a more authentic way.
I agree with the idea of immersion, that's what I alway try to do when I have a spare minute and what I've been doing since maybe 2010 (don't remember for sure) when I started to learn English. Still there's more to learning than just digesting the information you get, I guess it's also useful to practice productive skills like writing and speaking. Moreover, I find it extremely amusing This is a real fun to me.
Stay in touch!

P.S. Later on today I'm going to add a new piece of the story, some touches about love and blood, and then take a break to polish the story according to your comments.
Hope you enjoy it!

Oh yes, that was 2010, (I just noticed the note at my profile label on the left: Join date: Since dec 2009) which is exactly when I started.