Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

4

I think the point is that if you did need the subjunctive mood, "I be" would be what to use. In an archaic sentence like this one following, there are two uses of the subjunctive: If someone slight me, I shall run him through, whoever he be. It's possible to contrive a similar sentence for I: He can see through any disguise. He will always find me, ...


4

There are lots of ways of talking about starting cars. Except for (1) and (2), these are fine. There is an English grammar rule being violated in (1) and (2). Native speakers know it, because they follow it, but they usually can't state it. Non-native speakers need to be taught the rule, however, because it's not obvious. When a noun modifier consists of ...


3

The plural is the correct and more common form in your sentence: Economics: ( from Collins Dictionary ) (used with a sing. verb) The social science that deals with the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services and with the theory and management of economies or economic systems. (Economics) (functioning as plural) financial ...


3

We would not use coincide unless we were talking of significant events/situations/days that happen, unusually, to occur on the same day, as in " In 20XX, Chinese New Year coincides with western New Year. If there is nothing significant about the dates, we'd just say something like "The 24th of Shawwal is the 12th of October in the Gregorian/Western ...


2

There is an advantage in abbreviating some things Valid There is an advantage to abbreviating some things Valid There is an advantage of abbreviating some things Bad, ugly English. But... The advantage of abbreviation is that... or The advantages of abbreviation are... Perfectly acceptable.


2

This is an example of a subjunctive. The subjunctive form of the verb is frequently used in mandative clauses (certain clauses which contain the content of an order, desire, suggestion). The subjuntivee uses the plain form of the verb. The same form as the bare infinitive. The Original Poster's example I be would be grammatical in the following sentences: ...


2

You are free to choose any order you like, so long as 'and I' comes last.


2

The usual idiom is "falls on" The 24th of Shawwal falls on the 12th of October


2

"I don't want you worrying about the oral interview." That sentence is fine. Huddleston & Pullum (The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, 2002.12311-2) note that "the gerund-participial with want generally has a progressive interpretation, but in non-affirmative contexts it can be non-progressive". They say that I want them standing when ...


2

'Is been' is used in a dialect of English-cockney, spoken in the suburbs of London, East London. So, I think, 'She is been watching too much 'telly' lately' is used there. Incidentally, 'is been' is the passive of the auxiliary 'to be'. So, in "She is watching too much television lately", the grammatically correct form of the verb in the passive is the ...


2

The grammatical category associated with comparison of adjectives and adverbs is degree of comparison. The usual degrees of comparison are the positive ... the comparative ... and the superlative.


2

Economics - Merriam-Webster online describes the word as “noun plural but singular/plural in construction.” Referring to a social science, it’s singular: Economics is often called “the dismal science.”. Referring to a set of conditions, it’s plural: The economics of the project make it impossible to proceed. The economics of the ...


1

I'm standing 100 feet high or I'm standing at a height of 100 feet.


1

No, it can be applied to any moment or period of time in the past, whether distant or recent past.


1

Treat similarly named patches equally Your first example (as quoted above) is both grammatical and expresses the sense you explained in the question. Using a hyphen (ie, similarly-named patches) would explicitly indicate that similarly modifies named, not patches. The variants with the phrase “similar named patches” can be interpreted as a reference ...


1

I agree with Andrew that all the sentences you proposed except the last are grammatical, and have subtle differences in meaning. I would take that as a sign that the sentence needs rewriting to eliminate possible misunderstanding. Maybe something like "Treat patches with similar names in the same way." I hope it will be clear enough to the reader which ...


1

In this usage, "put" is the action. Take doesn't refer to an action. It means "use". More generally, this is using "take" to specify an object. Another form of this is when "take" means to consider as in "English is complicated. Take verbs for instance." This alternate meaning of "take" is the key to the famous line from a joke by Henny Youngman ...


1

Of those two, it is "She becomes popular in Canada", but as a stand-alone sentence, the progressive aspect would more common: "She is becoming popular in Canada."


1

"restored" is not the right word. . There is no reason to believe HP is "restored"; that would entail returning it to its prior value, which I presume is unknown (that is, it could vary by situation). What if HP's prior value were lower? You would have to REDUCE it in order to "restore" it. What if increasing HP by 10% of Att brought HP to a higher vale ...


1

It seems to me that in the light of your explanation, your statement that We are in agreement that the intended meaning of the sentence is that "HP" is restored by an amount equal to 10% of "Att." represents a justifiable interpretation. In the context of the explanation, I also find no problem with the wording of your query sentence, despite its ...


1

Although a constructive obligation is not created solely by a management decision, The later statement that contrasts this is an obligation may result from other earlier events together with such a decision. The first statement is saying that management decisions (without anything else) do not create an obligation. The second statement is saying ...


1

which one sounds more natural Both are correct, but the second one sounds more natural to me as a British English speaker. Which is more formal/informal Neither sounds particular formal/informal. Is there any difference at all? Not really. Both are valid, grammatical sentences. The second just sounds a little more natural to me.


1

A relative pronoun standing at the front of a simple relative clause may be omitted unless it acts as the subject of the relative clause. okI contribute to projects that I love. okI contribute to projects that support children. okI contribute to projects I love. but not, in formal use, ∗ I contribute to projects support children. ...


1

I don't think (that) including both sounds stilted. As always, context matters. If the conversation were about the attributes of an enjoyable Thanksgiving, and you said, "I don't care if the Turkey tastes like sawdust, as long as Uncle Bob doesn't make a fool of himself", I might respond, "I hope that Bob behaves himself and that the Turkey is delicious".


1

You are going to have to renew your passport. (future intention - sounds horrible without "gonna") means you'll have to do it in the near future. ("gonna" is a colloquialism for "going to") You have to renew your passport. (present simple) It refers to the present. You will have to renew your passport. (future simple) You'll have to do it at some ...


1

The distinction between "take" and "bring" appears to be regional. In the SE US, "bring" is never used when you talking about an immediate action. It means something you will do in the future and the destination is somewhere the person being transported will be returning to. There is an implied "back" after the "you". Example usages are "If you drop your ...



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