New answers tagged

0

Yes, this is correct and works both with and without the commas. The use of commas would slightly alter the meaning by conveying that 'implemented in' is mentioned in passing, but not of equal importance to 'derived for'. About verbs sharing an object, see also: How to combine in a sentence two verb-preposition pairs that have the same object? Comma ...


1

It sounds like you're writing a photo caption, i.e., words that appear underneath an image. The style for captions is generally less strict than writing a standard English sentence. You can probably write it however you want, I think the example above makes perfect sense. However, you may want to look at a style guide. For example, BuzzFeed Style Guide: ...


0

This is a parenthetical comma: "For instance, the availability of pornography on the internet is the main cause, particularly for men, to become ignorant to the pursuit of romantic relationships in the real world." Notice that the commas can be replaced by parentheses without changing the meaning: "For instance, the availability of pornography on the ...


0

None of the choices is really incorrect. They all express the same idea, and they're all grammatical. You didn't post the actual question from the exam, but it seems like it's asking for the best wording, not the only correct wording. B is the answer because it's simple and idiomatic, while the other choices are unnecessarily wordy and redundant. A native ...


3

The comma breaks the meaning up, as you've described. "Like hell, I'll be there" would indicate that you will be at a specific place, just as hell will also be at that place. This phrase with the commas is not idiomatic in writing or speech. "Like hell I'll be there" would emphatically deny that you will be at a specific location. This is the normal usage ...


0

It depends on what you mean by "correct." Neither is ungrammatical, but the first option is not generally correct under any standard of formal style. There are some style guides in which the second is incorrect, while in others it is correct.


-1

The sentence is grammatically correct as written. Replacing the comma with a semi-colon would be correct, but unorthodox, and writing it as two sentences would not be grammatically correct as it lacks a verb.


0

The example you have supplied is grammatically correct as you have written it. Your question is somewhat vague because the word after could be used in numerous contexts. The grammatical context is what will determine if a comma is necessary rather than the word itself. The most likely usage of 'after,' in a prepositional phrase, would not require a comma. ...


1

No comma at all is absolutely necessary in that sentence. Some grammar guides advise against using a comma when two clauses that could be sentences by themselves are joined with the conjuction "and." Some prescribe it (including Grammerly and Purdue OWL websites, to pick two). I would allow it either way. However, I would also drop the repeated subject "i" ...


-1

The comma goes inside the quotation marks, when it's followed by further information.


0

There are no dependent clauses in that construction (ignoring the ones headed by like...,to eat... and to visit...), but there are two coordinations: We [[are new...][and [ would like to [[eat in restaurants][or [visit pubs]]] with others ]]] . are new to the London area and would like to ... with others eat in restaurants or visit pubs The comma in the ...


2

You're right that #3 is correct, but primarily for a reason other than the one you mention. When you address someone or something directly, as with "Bob", you use commas to separate the form of direct address from the rest of the sentence. Hence, Thank you, Bob, for scheduling the call. Grammar Monster offers a clear explanation of the rule.


-1

3 is correct, since "Bob" is a parenthetical (in this sentence you = Bob, so Bob could be removed without affecting the structure). The commas set off the parenthetical.


0

You should not put a comma after Thursday. You should write it as "Thursday the seventh". This is the correct format, as you should also type out numbers from 0-10.


-1

You were told correctly. Despite Fumble’s reasonable assumption, it remains an assumption and there is no evidence in the sentence that there is only one chairman; it is quite possible that the chiefs have different chairmen for different committees. The sentence refers to the chairman who went to Afghanistan. Had there been a comma after chairman, we ...


0

I know this is seven years to late to help the OP, but ... From the context, I conclude that the lawyer wanted to rebut the testimony that the witness had never met the young man. The OP would know, but it seems the lawyer is stating that the witness was in the young man's presence at least once. On that occasion, he was in the store with his mother. The ...


0

Your sentence was perfectly understandable to me after I included the article the in front of train. Your commas were placed correctly: Your introductory phrase requires a comma after it, and the modifying phrase, who catch the train in the afternoon, requires commas around it. @Edwin Ashworth's sentence puts your thoughts into a more formal style (and ...


1

Based on comments under the question that provided clarification, I am prepared to provide an answer. In looking at the sentence, the main part of my personal confusion was this: … the only relevant information is, if such an unary language part is infinite, and if not, … To me, I interpreted the meaning of the phrase to be equivalent to this: The ...


Top 50 recent answers are included