Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

6

It is an example of a [reduced] absolute phrase. The following from grammar.ccc.com: ABSOLUTE PHRASE Usually (but not always, as we shall see), an absolute phrase (also called a nominative absolute) is a group of words consisting of a noun or pronoun and a participle as well as any related modifiers. Absolute phrases do not directly ...


5

One word is cataphora. Since the noun no longer precedes the pronoun that refers to it, that noun can be called a postcedent. Here's a bit from the wiki article on cataphora: In linguistics, cataphora ... is used to first insert an expression or word that co-refers with a later expression in the discourse.[1] example of strict, sentence-internal ...


5

There is no rule that prohibits the use of or to isolate clauses in your interrupting phrase: A word group (a statement, question, or exclamation) that interrupts the flow of a sentence and is usually set off by commas, dashes, or parentheses. Note: there are rules for using dashes, parentheses, and commas. See parentheses vs. double commas vs. ...


5

I would definitely use a comma. A semi-colon joins two related sentences and you have only one, albeit long, sentence. If you do do "their heads were crooked" then you do have two sentences, but I would use a period, not a semi-colon. I don't know your experience with English, but rarely do you need a semi-colon. If you have 2 sentences, a period works.


5

This is not about "to following which in a relative clause"; grammar is not strings of words. This is about a different type of Relative clause, a Relative Infinitive clause. The to is the infinitive verbal complementizer (for is the subject marker, but there's no subject here), marking the infinitive verb phrase run their own computer applications. A ...


3

''If he had any sense, he would do this.'' Leave your opinion of the subjects smartness implied. It works even better in the past tense; ''If he had any sense, he would have done this.''


3

Neither one of your sentences is correct: you are attempting to splice together two independent clauses using a comma alone, which is a big no-no. Try these instead: No gifts please. We don’t need any orchids and we already have a toaster. No gifts please; we don’t need any orchids and we already have a toaster. No gifts please: we don’t need any orchids ...


3

They need to obey the requirement [that their pockets are empty]. They need to obey the requirement [that their pockets be empty]. Both versions are grammatical and mean the same thing. Both versions involve mandative constructions: the mandative word "requirement", and a mandative clause "that their pockets are/be empty". Your first version ...


3

If you leave out the comma the sentence has a different meaning. "He wanted to go to the park, not the city for lunch" means that the choices are (a) go to the park and (b) go to the city for lunch. Lunch in the park is not implied. "He wanted to go to the park, not the city, for lunch" means that the choices are (a) go to the park for lunch and (b) go to ...


2

The relative pronoun who(m) refers to animate beings, like people or animals. Personalities, in the meaning it has in your example, means the characteristic traits of a person. A person's personality is not an animate being. You can't take it to the beach, for example, or feed it donuts. The personality of a person is an inanimate object (a thing). The ...


2

Doing Away with One’s Relatives It appears (that) your test-giver expects you to produce reduced relative clauses here. This is common, but by no means strictly necessary. The first sentence supports these possible correct solutions: All the students Dr. Freeman teaches do well in writing. All the students that Dr. Freeman teaches do well in writing. ...


2

The ambiguity arises in OP's rephrasing because in his version, [despite] losing could also mean having lost (a "completed", not a "continuous" action). The easiest way to avoid this is... Despite having been losing at half-time, City won in the end. The reason we don't normally use the above form is more fully explored by this answer on English ...


2

Your original sentence doesn't sound awkward or clumsy to me. The relative clause “which I don't find/consider him (to be)” is perfectly normal and common. It is somewhat formal in register, but that's not because of the relative clause-ness of it—the construction find/consider X to be Y is just a bit above normal, colloquial speech in register. The more ...


2

It sounds like what you mean is If he were smart, he would do this, but I fear he is not. or If he were smart, which I fear he is not, he would do this.


2

I don't understand why you want to use find instead of think or believe. If you're stressing your finding, you shouldn't put it in a non-restrictive relative clause. Relative clauses of any kind are for backgrounded presupposed material, not important matters. Think or believe -- besides meaning the same thing -- have the advantage that they can both take ...


2

I’m afraid that identifying types of clauses is much like identifying parts of speech. It depends who’s doing the analysis and what purpose they plan to put that to just which ones you get. Once you split between dependent and independent clauses, or clauses that stand in for another part of speech like noun, adjective, or adverb, the entire thing becomes ...


2

In this case the ordinary construction, use A as B, with as B following A, is inverted to avoid the ambiguity which is caused by the position of the relative clause. In your rewrite A common fault is to use a noun which expresses the entire action as the subject of a passive construction, leaving ... as the subject &c will almost certainly be ...


2

It is a participle phrase, with the verb implied. The sentence could be written He ran over to me, his delight [being] evident, and hugged me already. The phrase is used adjectivally to modify the pronoun He. It is very common to omit the participle being when the phrase includes both a noun (such as delight) and predicate adjective (such as evident). ...


2

The zero conditional is called that, because it is not really a condition. When speakers present an action or state in factual conditional terms (the so-called Zero Conditional), they are stating that they accept that action or state as reality If you heat ice, it melts. If Andrea cooks, I wash up. If it’s ten o’clock already, then I’m late. General ...


2

Yes, you can have more than one conditional. Should you ever be on a trip to a foreign land, if you want to stay dry there, you would do well to learn their expression for "chance of rain". But your examples are ungrammatical in their placement of the conditional clauses and in their tenses. Some of your so-called irrealis forms can be expressed ...


2

To replace 'to' with 'and' here would not be grammatically incorrect, but you would lose the rhythmic and rhetorical impact of the "from... to... to..." format of your sentence. Personally, I'd leave it as it is. Regarding another stylistic issue, I would replace ...gave me the conviction that this is the place for me. with the more elegant ...


2

Gaping question is not common, and its meaning could easily be misinterpreted, but neither of the individual definitions is offended by the coupling: gaping ADJECTIVE (Of a hole, wound, etc.) wide open: question NOUN A sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information: 1.1 A doubt about the truth or validity of ...


2

In general, subordinating conjunctions become part of the subordinated clause they create, which means the position of the subordinated clause (including the conjunction) in the sentence relative to the other (main) clause can change. Coordinating conjunctions, however, must remain between the two clauses (or whatever elements). In the case of "for" and ...


2

The which-clauses in your example sentences ( ... which is quite a surprise, ... which isn't what I'd expected, ... which is difficult) are indeed relative clauses, not non-relative clauses. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (p1118) refers to such evaluative or comment clauses as sentential relative clauses. For The Cambridge Grammar of the ...


2

The clause in question: where almost all those taking part in Robert Scott's ill-fated South Pole expedition perished sometime between late February and mid-March of 1912 where: the Ross Ice Shelf those: the people that took part in Robert Scott's ill-fated South Pole expedition


2

According to data from stations on the Ross Ice Shelf -where almost all those taking part in Robert Scott's ill-fated South Pole expedition perished sometime between late February and mid-March of 1912 - temperatures as low as those recorded in Scott's journal have been documented only once in the past 15 years. In the subordinate clause: where ...


2

"Which reminds me." is an appositive relative clause which is associated with one of the two preceding sentences (I'm not sure which), and the "which" refers to that sentence. It would be more usual to use a comma to show its connection to the preceding clause it goes with, but here the fact that the preceding is a direct quotation would make that ...


2

Traditionally, a clause is indeed a finite verb and all its dependencies. The subject of the sentence is he, the (direct) object his daughter. The verb let is special in that it often has an object and an infinitive as a tertiary complement (third thingy that strongly depends on it, besides subject and object). You could analyse the infinitive after let as ...


2

You're just asking about terminology, right? Can one call a phrase with a subject and a non-finite verb a "clause"? The answer is yes, that is an ordinary use of the term "clause". There are both finite clauses (i.e., tensed clauses) and non-finite clauses. And, as you say, your example has two clauses: a main finite clause whose verb is "let" and an ...


1

From the online Chicago Manual of Style - 6.58 Semicolons in a complex series (paid subscription, sorry if the link doesn't work). "When items in a series themselves contain internal punctuation, separating the items with semicolons can aid clarity." I think this one is kind of up to you. But I'd format your sentence like this: I am involved in all ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible