Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

5

1 is wrong because using it gives two finite predicates joined only by a comma. Bracket out the modifiers and here's what you end up with: Jesse Jackson's Rainbow PUSH Coalition was established for this reason , was created in 1996 in this way. 5, however, subordinates the established clause, so you have only one finite predicate: Jesse Jackson's ...


4

There needs to be a phrase for there to be a phrasal verb. The prepositions "in," "by," "off," and "out" when added to "drop" make phrases. In "Just drop it," the verb is only the single word "drop." This is simply an idiomatic use of "drop" meaning to abandon a topic of conversation.


3

This article from 'The Garden of Phrases at Grammar.ccc.com gives a good overview: 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 connect to ...


2

You want the bare infinitive here: "makes the received signals have." The use of the to-infinitive was once more popular, and it survives in religious contexts where it has an archaic feel: he maketh me to lie down in green pastures (It's hard to tell what's going on in the sentence because of the "xxx," but I'm willing to bet you want "xxx ...


2

I agree with you that the phrase seems redundant but technically, it is grammatically correct. A large group of crowds A large group of [plural-noun] A large group of marbles A large group of buildings A large group of trees A large group of sheep As you can see, any plural noun is acceptable instead of crowds. Since crowds is ...


2

Following the link and looking at the text preceding the first sentence, it soon becomes clear that the article was written by a non-native speaker of English. I would say that it's an error and perhaps reflects some idiom in the writer's own language. I couldn't access the original text for the second quote for some reason. I would say that it may be a ...


2

Some time ago it was commonplace and accepted practice to use a apostrophe for plurals of foreign nouns which ended in a vowel (Romance languages in particular have a higher incidence of final vowels than English). There's a longish account of apostrophe use in Wikipedia , which mentions this: Lynne Truss, author of Eats, Shoots & Leaves, points out ...


2

Leaving out the articles is grammatical. But as the comments say, we're much more likely to leave out the article when the items are connected. For example, Googling shows "bought a car and trailer" is more common than "bought a car and a trailer"; but "bought a car and house" less common than "bought a car and a house" (although Google search finds both). ...


2

'Liable' means (in one sense), 'open to', 'capable of', with no necessary connotation of the likelihood or probability of the event. So, "Such a figure is open to/capable of being [= liable to be] attacked ....". 'Likely', on the other hand, so far as I can imagine right now, always suggests a connotation of probability (likelihood). So, "What he told me ...


2

No. "Me" must either be the object, "The dragon ate me" or the complement to subject, "The dragon is me". Whenever you are the the subject, always use "I"! I and John are going to the movies. and if you're being polite, you put the yourself last: John and I are going to the movies.


1

In writing, placing a word or phrase at the end of a sentence generally gives it greater focus. So in "I was there to get a hair cut yesterday," the focus is on when the subject got his hair cut, whereas in "I was there yesterday to get a hair cut," the focus is on why the subject was there yesterday. Of course, when speaking we tend to use stress and ...


1

The real difference comes when they are in context, e.g. Didn't I see you in the shopping centre recently? Maybe - I was there to get a haircut yesterday. Have you visited the new shopping centre yet? I was there yesterday to get a haircut. Note I'm not saying that it's impossible to swap those over but there really is a difference ...


1

When you turn on the radio while the house is quiet, or you use the radio in your car, you have several choices of music to listen to. That version is correct and perfectly understandable. You could also say, e.g. When you turn on the radio while the house is quiet or use the radio in your car you have several choices of music to listen to. I have ...


1

The other answers are right, but perhaps it would be helpful to write out the correct version of the sentence for you: The volume of sand would be measured after all excess sand had flowed back into the container from the individual’s cupped hand.


1

Using the simple past ("you suggested") implies that the writer has in mind some specific occasion when the suggestions were made, such as at a meeting. Using the present perfect ("you have suggested") implies that the writer is not thinking of any specific time in the past when the suggestions were made but simply has the suggestions in mind currently, as ...


1

They are pretty interchangeable, but the second is the one to use, because it is more mellifluous. That second present perfect comes across pretty tedious, and it really isn't necessary. You could also say to incorporate your suggested changes.


1

Both are acceptable. It really depends on the situation. The first is more formal, the second would be more likely to happen if you were saying the sentence. If writing it, a compromise on "you've" might be better.


1

C implies that the giraffes stayed alive for the purpose of passing the trait to their offspring; maybe true from some biological standpoint, but probably not what the giraffes were consciously doing. E uses the present tense instead of the past tense. B should use "their" instead of "its", since the subject is not a single giraffe.


1

The answer is different for the two sentences. In the first, you were buying items from among (presumably) many. Many melons, many lemons, many pineapples. So, for each kind of fruit, you picked one, previously unspecified. You need the indefinite article "a" for each fruit: I bought a melon, a lemon and a pineapple. In the second, it might be that ...


1

It's not that the last three don't make sense at all; it's that they are incomplete for most instances because all three verbs have transitive uses. But an object is not necessary to complete the sense for "got": I got into the car. And I can contrive a sense for "show." For this you have to know that "far along" refers to the time that a woman has ...


1

Did you still want to go to the park today? One of the uses for this form is to politely suggest reluctance on the part of the asker. By using the past tense there is a nuance that they hope the wanting is in the past.


1

Maybe the word you're trying to remember from your English class is person "a grammatical category applied esp. to pronouns and verbs, used to distinguish between the speaker of an utterance, the person addressed, and other people or things spoken about. Compare first person, second person, third person." Random House Kernerman Webster's College ...


1

Though the origin of both words is the same, the usage is different. drunk is the p.p. of drink, and you're right to use it in your example: I have drunk the water drunken is an adjective meaning that someone has drunk alcohol more than he can handle: (similar to another usage of drunk): He's really drunk. They are a bunch of drunken idiots. ...


1

The past participle is "drunk". "Drunken" is an adjective, its use as the past participle is obsolete. Thus I have drunk the water, while my drunken father has drunk another beer. Next time you may prefer to check out a dictionary to avoid people's angry comments.. :)


1

Some people say were in this sentence, including me. But I hear many people saying was. In other words, this is a sentence where you can use the subjunctive, if you are one of those people who like to use the subjunctive. But don't get too frustrated when you hear it with "was" -- and you will hear a lot of that. Is it a subjunctive or not, despite people ...


1

Both are past reports ("told") of your manager saying directly "You are not doing great at work." To make the statement make sense in a report, you have to shift the person to first from second -- "told me that I ...." and you have a choice of verb tenses in the report. You may backshift to the past to accommodate the past report: "that I was not doing ...


1

It's context sensitive. If you are genuinely asking "I wonder why the other bakery doesn't have dinner rolls, but you do?", then it's just a question. If you are not asking in order to get a response, but are instead commenting on the sad state of the other bakery (perhaps you are making a point to this baker that he needs to be well-stocked in dinner ...


1

The key issue here involves the word them, which appears in the highlighted sentence in multiple editions of A Voyage to Arcturus. I think this word is a typo—and at least one edition of the book agrees with me. From David Lindsay, A Voyage to Arcturus (1963): Maskull gazed at the fantastically piled rock all around them. "I saw these rocks from ...


1

My U.S. answer: A: "Let's go, shall we?" B: "Yes, let's!" It doesn't sound old-fashioned or jarring to me, as it did to Nicole, but maybe it's a generational thing.


1

I agree with Edwin Ashworth's comment although I'm not sure about the necessity for a semicolon. My answer A: "Let's go, shall we?" B: "Yes let's." If pushed I might insert a comma and say, "Yes, let's" but personally I find that unnecessary.



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