Tag Info

New answers tagged

1

1) I believe all five are syntactically correct (under my own personal command of the English language). 2) Only I gave him $1. I was the only person to give him $1. This might suggest that there was a situation in which others might have also given $1, but didn't. "He was begging for a dollar to use in the vending machine, but people passed him by. ...


-1

Being a native-English speaker, I don't see any grammatically problem in your statement. However, I feel it's a little bit odd. And if you ask me to rewrite it in my words then I will rewrite something like: I walked over to the payphone and tried to call you. Thanks.


1

The sentence makes perfect sense. The first to has different meaning then the other two to's. Also it is a different part of speech as it turns out the first is a preposition: I walked over to the payphone The to here is used in sense one as given in the oxford dictionaries 1: Expressing motion in the direction of (a particular location) ...


-1

I'm not sure what is being asked exactly, but I do have a general understanding of what you are getting. One of the issues that you are dealing with is style, and if you are following a particular style required by whomever you are writing for, then you should follow that. If not, however, then you need to use the correct terminology. First, those are not ...


1

"Quickly" is an adverb and as such is modifying either "leave" or "decided." Some adverbs can float around in a sentence and the meaning will stay intact, others need to stay rooted near the verbs they are modifying. The last example is bad writing because the adverb is far away from either verb and thus creates an ambiguity. Maybe this is solved by ...


1

In the example you chose it becomes difficult to segregate a quick decision from the act of leaving the room. This is because the thought process and the action are closely related in time and speed. It is difficult to imagine someone making a quick decision to do something slowly, or vice versa. So the two inevitably become conflated. So why don't we think ...


1

Firstly, many people, including myself, think it is fine to sometimes split infinitives. I agree, though, that the sentence did change there. The latter choice (to leave the room quickly) matches the original meaning, but I would agree that it loses a degree of the impact of the adverb by being left to the end of the sentence. Personally, I would stick ...


0

To my mind, the first implies that the monastery-joiner (let's call them) has not considered joining a monastery before, and the question is a suggestion to that effect. This means that it is a rhetorical question; the monastery-joiner is not expected to answer, only to consider the possibility of joining. The second is a more direct question. It seems to ...


4

There was a girl, Patricia, who was very tall. This introduces the girl to us. It could be the beginning of a narrative. I met a group of girls. There was one girl, Patricia, who was very tall. In this case we have singled out just one of the girls from a previously mentioned group.


0

I haven't been able to figure out what "parallelism" is, in general, but one place it is invoked is, indeed, a syntactic structure. The structure is the conjunction of two or more phrases of the same syntactic category. This comes up in three sorts of constructions: A. Conjunction reduction (so-called): [N' [N' [A blue] spots] and [N' [A red] spots] ...


0

I'm from NW Ohio. I find that it is okay to omit "to be" when the relevant action is a matter of frequent routine. For instance, to accept "This bedroom needs rebuilt", I have to imagine myself an inspector or foreman of some sort who often has occasion to pass judgment on whether parts of dwellings pass muster.


0

It is also possible to explain: The car needs (being) washed. And I think that is as logical as "Your hair needs cutting". I don't know spoken Pennsilvanian American English, though I have read a lot of American literature, but I guess this construction is a special construction after to need that you can't extend to other verbs.


0

"Somebody needs killing" is a commonly heard saying in the SE United States. I have heard examples in the SE similar to the ones cited from PA/Ohio Valley. The construction of the phrasing seems to be a way to to create a Passive Voice. Rather than saying: Somebody needs to wash the car. Somebody needs to clean the room. Somebody needs to feed the ...



Top 50 recent answers are included