> Edit: One super interesting aspect is that to speak fluent native English you have to do it wrong. Californians, for example, don’t use the plural contraction. You have to say “there’s many options” instead of “there are many options”. Otherwise you sound like a weirdo.

You’re viewing it the wrong way around. L1 speakers almost never use formalized grammar rules (especially not in everyday speech). Instead, the rules are formulated post-hoc based on the way the language is actually spoken.

In a sense, there’s no ‘correct’ or ‘incorrect’ language use, only successful or unsuccessful attempts at communication.

For this reason, I find the topic of input-based language learning interesting. The basic idea is that the only true way to acquire a language is by getting a lot of input (i.e. immersion), not by studying grammar rules.

(Disclaimer: not a linguist.)

> Californians, for example, don’t use the plural contraction. You have to say “there’s many options” instead of “there are many options”. Otherwise you sound like a weirdo.

Don't extrapolate too far from a small sample. I don't think anyone would recognize you as a non-Californian just for saying "there are".

Now, if you refer to highways US-101 or I-5 as anything other than "The 101" or "The 5", then you're clearly not from here!

Wikipedia does not back me up on this, however. Apparently the "The" names are SoCal-indicative. This has not been my experience here in NorCal.

FWIW, I learned the meaning of "based" once, but I found the explanation dissatisfying and promptly forgot it. :)

> Basically feels impossible for to ever fully catch up.

Feels this way whether you're a native English speaker or not, unfortunately — growing old is universal.