New answers tagged

0

"... find a good path to take this mission on" would describe the physical route you're taking the mission on, like walking a dog, if you delve into it too literally. Otherwise it would describe the path the mission would be taken through, the way the actual mission would be handled. "... find a good path to taking this mission on" describes the path to how ...


0

It is only your phone that can display a name, and so it is clearly your phone that this participial phrase is modifying. However, when a participial phrase is separated from the word it modifies, it requires a comma: My phone will ring, displaying your name. Still, this sentence seems problematic to me because, even as it modifies the noun, it bears ...


2

I have found that [knowing how to effectively manage and organize paperwork, requests, and deadlines] is the only way in which to get the job done effectively. It's fine with singular "is". The reason is that non-finite clause subjects take singular verb agreement. Here, the large subordinate that- clause (in bold) functioning as complement to the verb "...


3

That's the disease of scientific papers. Very little can be done if a person (and the scientific environment) tend to be very formal in their texts. The drastic solution is to introduce a bit of informality: "When we integrate multiple datasets this allows us to explore a broader set of problems than if ...". In fact, this makes reading much easier. The ...


0

I found this conversation while searching for the origin of "Human Being" to gain a deeper understanding of the peoples my father credited with the origin. My answer or insight on the true origin of Human Being is based on personal experience. Research into anything my father told me has always proven his answer to be correct. The subjects were always ...


1

As I understand the syntax of English nominalizations, it should be either "the taking of the bull ..." or "taking the bull ...", but *"the taking the bull ..." or *"(no article) taking of the bull ...". This is because "taking" may either be a noun derived from the verb "take" or it may be a gerund form of that verb (hence a verb). And nouns take articles ...


6

You have to keep in mind that <l> and <ll> are both extremely common in English, regardless of region. For example, bill is always spelled <bill>, and nil is always spelled <nil>; excel is always spelled <excel>, and retell is always spelled <retell>. There are a lot of individual rules, but there's no single over-arching ...


1

Since the remarks are in the past, you probably want to use a construction that uses a past tense form of 'criticize' as you mention, i.e. : "... statements by the President in 2007, which criticized the party as being violent." Note that I've added "being" to make it more clear that we are applying the adjective to the party's actions, and not the party ...


4

Unfortunately, the linked answer is very vague, and not correct. It does point out correctly that gerunds are more common as subjects than infinitives. But it certainly doesn't provide any rule that works. The British Council is right. It depends on the predicate in every case, and often both are OK. The examples given are both correct, and illustrate a ...



Top 50 recent answers are included