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

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 ...


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

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 ...


4

Because your theoretical sentence is a dependent (or subordinate) clause, the answer is no. However, as with many grammatical rules, if the context in which you are writing is informal (e.g., fiction), then it is perfectly fine and subject to your discretion; if the context is formal, you should more than likely not use a dependent clause as a standalone ...


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

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 ...


3

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 ...


3

I don't think the parenthesis idea works at all. Let's remove "we suddenly see": Are a dozen or more sailing in the clear blue sky? Ok. (I'd love to know what are sailing in the blue sky). So, what did we take out? we suddenly see Either this means "see" literally; in which case we can count "them" Or "see" means to be aware of - Merriam ...


3

If that and who were used as relative pronouns, you would be correct: that would be used as the restrictive relative pronoun for things, and who for humans, but those sentences require that as a conjunction. He was so angry that he didn't let me talk to him. In the sentences below that and who are used as relative pronouns. Katrina was the storm that ...


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

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

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

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

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 ...


2

"What" in your examples is usually considered a relative pronoun (not a subordinating conjunction). And if you classify it that way, it solves your problem. In your example, "what makes me sad" is indeed a clause, with a subject, just as one would expect -- the subject is "what". Ordinary relative clauses modify some noun, but here, there is no noun to ...


2

In the case of your sample fragment, I would say yes, it modifies the nearest noun phrase, virtualized hardware components. To make it refer to the earlier noun phrase a complete virtual system, you would need to add commas (or better yet, parentheses), like so: a complete virtual system, consisting of virtualized hardware components, onto which an ...


1

Is leaving out the "they" between "and" and "are" just for the sake of reading with a better flow or something? Yes, though it was probably not a fully-conscious decision; people will "just" write or speak like that naturally. Deciding not to omit the they could come across as adding an undue emphasis. Should it have just left out the comma? ...


1

Here is the entry for comma splice in Merriam-Webster's Eleventh Collegiate Dictionary (2003): comma splice n (1924) : the unjustified use of a comma between coordinate main clauses not connected by a conjunction (as in "nobody goes there any more, it's boring") This definition identifies two requirements for a comma splice: (1) it must involve a ...



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