Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

4

This answer depends on the context and the speaker. If one is speaking about a body or a corpse, "it" is often used. Partly, it is for psychological reasons. We often don't want to identify with the dead person. If you are writing for a rag, then you'll write: He was found half-eaten in a ravine frequented by coyotes. If you're writing more thoughtfully, ...


3

Consider this example: There is some milk in the fridge. What would be the question to which you could offer that sentence as an answer? Do we have any milk in the fridge? Where is the milk? The first one - so, there is is used to say that some milk exists in the fridge, and therefore it is a dummy existential subject. As professor Lawler ...


3

By itself, that statement is ambiguous; there is no way to tell whether it is Brahma or Indra that has made the mistake. You can add some context around it to make clear whose mistake it was: Brahma saw that Indra had made a mistake. Brahma explained to Indra the mistake he had committed. (Clearly here Indra made the mistake.) Brahma examined ...


3

The text can be corrected easily by inserting a missing word (which is what the error is — there's a word missing): Born of Ibuza Parents in Nigeria, novelist Buchi Emeta moved to England in 1962, since which time she has lived in North London. Which here relates time to 1962. OED calls this the "ordinary relative adjective": III. Relative uses. ...


1

There are three styles of using "you and I" or "you and me". For each I will give two example sentences - the first with "you and I/me" as the subject and the second with "you and I/me" as the object. Style 1: You and me beat him. He hates you and me. This is normal English as learned by all children, found in most prose and dialogue in works of the ...


1

MT_Head's answer sounds right to me when it comes to southern US English, but in Indian English, the situation is a little different - "who all are" is the correct plurality for the verb. I don't think it's correct to categorize the Indian English version of "who all" as a pronoun. At minimum, there is no analogy to "you all", since that isn't a lexical ...


1

I think it is a peculiarity of the text that is because they were following the grammatical peculiarities of the original language, where the reflexive is not used for such constructions. In Hebrew it was something like the following: I-made-great my-works. I-built for-me houses. I-planted for-me vineyards. I-made for-me orchards and-gardens ...


1

Given enough time, I believe it's likely that the English word "you" will increasingly be superseded by lowercase "u" for the simple fact that it sounds identical, it intuitively and immediately carries the identical meaning, and does the work with 2/3 fewer letters. Glance through the etymology of the word "I," which historically "cost" the scribe at least ...


1

Linguists will sometimes talk about the "weight" of a phrase. This refers roughly to the length. For example, you can say "She showed the dirty spot on the floor of the house to me" or you can say "She showed me the dirty spot on the wall of the house" because "the dirty spot on the floor of the house" is long enough that it doesn't disrupt the ...



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