I agree with your hesitancy—it does sound unnatural. If possible, it'd feel more natural to refocus on what entails being a winner, such as:
"The person in the group who completes the most exercises is the winner."
Neither really sound right. Adding the number of participants makes the sentence sound stilted. With regard to the correct preposition, I would use "of" rather than "among". So for instance this sounds more natural: "Complete the most exercises of all participants".
The second part "and become a winner" would also sound better if you used "to" rather than "...
There are 2 answers:
This is the town where I was born.
This is the town in which I was born.
I see that you have pointed out the in at the end of the second sentence. However it does not gel very well with either of the two - where/ which - in that position.
The sentence would be:
This is the town which I was born in and it sounds rather odd.
In must go ...
It looks correct to me. I write poetry/songs, and I firsthand have thought that locations of prepositional phrases were an issue. However, after receiving feedback from teachers throughout my education (along with submitting poetry with these types of 'issues'), they explain that poetry has no limit. Most poets break some rules of grammar and all that, so ...
Verbs of speech, like ask, answer, reply, say, or tell, are very complex and can address a number of details, which may or may not correspond with other verbs. Since these are words about words, they have plenty of recursive properties, and quite unique grammars.
Say, for instance, can take a direct quotation as a direct object, while tell can't
He said "...
You could try this:
"Each time the filter changes the appearance of your face, there is accompanying music that decreases in pitch."
Another possibility, which is a little more evocative, could be, "Each time the filter changes the appearance of your face, there is accompanying music that winds down in pitch."
This would indicate that every time you hear ...
Context is important here.
He refused the organisation’s offer for help.
The organisation requires his help. They are offering him something in exchange for the help. It is not acceptable. He refused the organisation’s offer for help.
He refused the organisation’s offer to help
The organisation wants to help him and he doesn’t want it.
The word “for” is usually used to show:
Purpose e.i. “I wear old trousers for painting.”
Denote a receiver of something e.i. “She bought a teapot for her sister.”
Express duration e.i. “I usually go there for a couple of hours.”
Indicate exchange e.i. “The shirt was sold for a dollar.”
Replace “because” e.i. “I missed school yesterday for I was sick.”
I think I might describe "walking through" a field of long grass - up to my waist. But I'd probably walk "across" one of short grass.
"Walking through" also, to me suggests just walking through part of the field, while "walking across" means all the way from one side to the other.
Those are just a couple of instinctive observations of someone brought up in ...
"I am traveling to Seoul" implies that you will be journeying from somewhere else to Seoul.
"I am traveling in Seoul" implies that you will be traveling around within the boundaries of Seoul (and perhaps associated communities).
"I am traveling Seoul" is less idiomatic in most English-speaking communities, but it suggests you will be touring around within ...
In effective writing, the word "impact" should be used ON something or ON someone. I haven't encountered from many years studying English about using impact with the preposition TO joining it, e.g. impact on faith and belief vs. impact to faith and belief.
"What" means "that which". "In what we believe" is wrong because it means "In that which we believe", where the "in" is in front of the wrong word. We want to say we "believe in things", not "believe things". Therefore the "in" should be in front of "which", and this gives the construction the writer is feeling his way towards:
"That in which we believe".
Both are correct but the meaning changes depending on how you interpret the relations between the words. I would dissect the sentences as follows:
The program offers something. The something are solutions for customers and partners.
(solutions for customers and partners = one entity)
The program offers solutions. The offer goes out to customers and ...
This is the fault of attempting to make English conform to the grammar of Latin.
When translating Latin, due to the history of how the locative case wound up being absorbed into the ablative case, the convention is to use the preposition at instead of in when a city name is the compliment to the preposition. English-speaking people who wanted to appear ...
Welcome to the site. Good question!
This is a farely unusual sentence construction in English. It's a structure that's hardly ever used in contemporary, colloquial speech, except in fossilised idioms like:
"of paramount concern" or "of utmost importance".
It's the possesive/genitive of, the same as the of in a phrase like "the Queen of England".
Which CGEL? "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language” (Quirk et al) - or "The Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language” (Huddleston et al) – (I suspect Huddleston - I don't think anyone else would call "because" a preposition.)
Consider the nuances:
1. I bought the book because I wanted to read it. -> caused by my wanting to read it
I bought ...
[For her to lose the election] would make me very happy.
Yes to your first question. The subject of the bracketed infinitival subject clause is "her", whose referent (antecedent) would have been mentioned earlier in the discourse.
Yes and no to your second question. Preposition and subordinator are different word classes (parts of speech) so a word can't ...
You can think of by, in this case, in the way she got excited, she got excited due to earn this toy.
Using "with", passes the idea of the feeling that she had when she acquires it, the feeling when she in his company, maybe playing with it, using it.
So, by is used to express the way that she got excited. And with, expresses the idea of his possession ...
It depends on the context; if the context is one of possible administrative support at different levels, then to make that clear in your enunciation you use "at". On the other hand, if the context is not one that includes that notion you use "on".
An examination of the usage for "at" and "on" from the following ngrams will show, however, that it is ...
It is nice of you means you are showing gratitude to that person. You are thankful to the person who gave the lecture.
It is nice for you means you are telling the person that they have done something good for themselves.
There is no rule of prepositions to use with nice. It just depends on the syntax.
The adjective learned takes a prepositional phrase complement headed by in or about. There seems to be a difference in usage: in is used with a field of study whereas about is used with things more concrete.
By the Senior year he had already become learned in Logic, and a master of the devices of Oratory
The mind becomes learned in many things having ...
It is possible they were thinking of On Exhibition when they were saying In an exhibition. The result: In Exhibition would be not an unusual mistake, to make what you are saying fit what you think it is supposed to look like. It is likely why there is any occurrence of the other phrase.
In the sentence in question, "that end" refers to the goal of happiness, mentioned in the first sentence of the quote. "All men seek happiness......The will never takes the least step except to that end." In other words, no one intentionally does anything unless it is with the goal of achieving his own happiness."
You couldn't use "except" here without "to"....
The sentence means that people (well, in this case, men) only do what they want to do. Their will is their desire, goal, aspiration, decision."Never take the least step" means the same as the idiomatic "lift a finger" (do the least little thing). "Except to that end" means to only do something towards the objective - the end here is the objective to be ...
Why are you so busy with Torah? The Quran already gives you whatever is in the Torah, plus; there's no distortion in it, so read it instead!"
is the best but could still use some improvement. The comma and semicolon usage is non-standard. But I would just split it into another sentence.
Why are you so busy with Torah? The Quran already gives you ...
This is just idiomatic English and has been for many centuries. Take for example part of this recipe "[f]or to make gyngerbred" from circa 1400:
Tak & put half a quart hony in a bras panne
(Take and put half a quart honey in a brass pan)
(Via the MED and another site)
That same recipe also calls for you to "tak a pound of pouder gyngere" (take ...
I think it's excluded because it adds no value to the instructions. Historically recipes have either been hand-written or printed which means limited space on a page. Removing words that add no value is a logical efficiency gain (especially when writing by hand). I would guess this approach has just grown to become the standard.
This is slang/informal English, at least American English. It is simply shorthand for "because of", "because it is", etc.
No work tomorrow because holidays!
Just means "No work tomorrow because of holidays"
Of course evolution is true, because science.
Means "Of course evolution is true, because science has demonstrated it to be true"
Well, here's an article in The Atlantic from as far back as 2013. It suggested that this use of "because" as a preposition had already become common even then.
At the same time, the Cambridge Dictionary acknowledges the prepositional use of the word ...
One is used in cases of a adjective applied to a proper noun, i.e. “a history book”. In the case “history book” is a proper noun to describe a item within a genre.
Where as the other form is applying a prepositional phrase; i.e “a book of Fairytales”. In this case the noun is the book, and “fairytales” is a secondary noun that describes the subject matter ...
In "scene of crime", "of crime" is a prepositional phrase, acting like an adjective and modifying "scene".
In "crime scene", "crime" is a noun being used as an adjective to modify "scene". Nouns that modify other nouns are called noun adjuncts, adjectival nouns, noun modifiers, and several other terms, depending on which sect of English grammarism you ...
I don't think grammar books say that you always use gerund after any 'to' :) . One thing is the phrasal verb 'to look forward to' which requires noun/gerund; the other - the adjective 'glad' which requires 'about', 'of', 'for', or an infinitive (hence 'to').
So: 'glad to hearing' is incorrect because
This is an excellent question! Unfortunately the English language provides no good solution, as you can see from the other responses. And I would not be surprised if this was a problem in many other languages.
Personally I would go with your option 2: "To add or remove a product from your shopping cart". I wouldn't be happy about it, but options 1 and 3 are ...
I cannot tell you what the difference is but I can tell you this:
Based off of is less formal but is used more often in convesation
Based on has been in use for centuries yet based off of is more recently popular
Based on is generally favored as gramatically correct but is not seen as straightforward as someting like would of vs would have
REACTION TO (SOMETHING)
Here, the noun 'reaction' takes the preposition 'to' after it.
ABSTAINING SMOKERS = PEOPLE ABSTAINING FROM SMOKING.
Here, 'abstaining' is the present participle adjective, premodifying the noun "smoker".
So, the sentence is grammatically correct.
Now is the time to reimagine your noun shopping cart as a noun adjunct—functioning as an adjective to modify your noun product:
*To add or remove a shopping cart product . . . *
No prepositions necesssary.
The coordination of the verbs fails whatever preposition is used. Consider picking a different verb like move.
To move a product into or out of your shopping cart...
If you're sticking with add and remove, consider rephrasing:
To add a product to or remove one from...
In this instance, "abstaining" is an adjective - someone who currently abstains (specifically, from smoking).
We can rewrite the sentence like this:
Does the reaction of [people abstaining from smoking] to [the smell of other people's cigarettes] predict relapse?
So [people abstaining from smoking] react to [the smell of other people's cigarettes]
Yes, abstain takes from, but that's not the way to parse this sentence.
This sentence is talking about the reaction of "abstaining smokers", and that reaction is their reaction to others' smoke.
You could say "Does the reaction of Andrew to the smell...", or rephrase the sentence as "Does abstaining smokers' reaction to..."
I personally would use;
To, if you were saying the university degree would change the type of work you did.
In, if you were saying the university degree would change the way you worked in that career.
Though I can understand what is meant when someone says "work in the company," it sounds odd to me. So, I tried to see how many instances of it I might be able to find through collocation databases, Google's Ngram or even just a general search of the web, and was quite surprised to see that "in the company" is much more prevalent that "at the company." ...