New answers tagged

1

In English, you used to be able to form questions by inverting the verb and the subject. So Shakespeare could say where go you with bats and clubs? We no longer do this: If the main verb has an auxiliary verb (is, do, can, will, etc.) we invert the subject and the auxiliary verb. But if there's no auxiliary verb, then unless the main verb is a form of ...


3

Short answer Only the matrix clause in a sentence requires subject-auxiliary inversion to make it interrogative (and not if the wh-word is part of a Subject phrase). In other words, all other things being equal, we use subject-auxiliary inversion to mark sentences, not subordinate clauses as interrogative. We only use the auxiliary DO, when some ...


0

Unless it is emphasized or separated from the main verb, the tense of a clause is expressed as a suffix on the main verb. Your example sentence is grammatical if do is emphasized. In the analysis Chomsky gave in Syntactic Structures, this is handled by treating emphasis as a separate morpheme Emph, which works like a verbal auxiliary and to which do can be ...


3

"Have" as an auxiliary always patterns as an auxiliary ("have you seen", "I haven't seen" etc). "Have" as a full verb can pattern either as an auxiliary ("Have you any?" "I haven't any") or as a normal verb ("Do you have any?" "I don't have any"). In American English, "do" support is more common with it, and I believe that questions and negatives without ...


1

You are not wrong, but most casual AmE speakers would not use the subjunctive mood (even though it is correct). I happen to like it, and I don't mind sounding affected now and then. Much more "common" would be something like:Whether or not our work is finished, daylight is fading. We're done.Whether our work is finished or not, daylight is fading. We're done....


2

The server can [do stuff], and only push assets [blah]. or The server can [do stuff], and only pushes assets [blah]. Both are fine as, in the first, "only push" implies "can only push" or "will only push". If you want to avoid ambiguity you can add the "can" or "will" into your sentence but I had no problem reading it as it is.


1

The first two mean the same thing, that going would be a wise course of action for the speaker. The third sentence means that the speaker must go (i.e., it is a requirement).



Top 50 recent answers are included