During the recent years there have been many reasons that have encouraged the people to travel. In this sentence, the use of "the" is unnecessary or in not always needed before plural nouns. The readability of the text improves when you get rid of extra "sticky" words like articles. It smooths out the flow: During recent years...
I am not a native speaker, but I am a pretty good English speaker and I get confused with prepositions a lot. But in my opinion, for the 1st one, either on or in can work. If we say on the street, I think the emphasis is that the car was parked outside on the street, instead of parking in a garage, for instance. That is, where the car was spotted is the ...
This is starting the sentence with a subordinate clause. It takes some doing to get that part of the sentence from the back to the front but it can be done. As you may have noticed it is not attractive. The purpose of it is to make the sentence seem more urgent. In addition, the sentence sounds as if the conversation is already underway so it can draw ...
"With" is a preposition, so starting a sentence with it is not "natural". In your example, "with many of tourist returning from the sure due to bad weather" is a prepositional phrase that acts as an adverb modifying "decided". The "natural" place to put an adverb is next to the verb it is modifying, but "...
You may change the preposition according to the place and in fact it is usual in some cases to use another one than "at". If the precise spot is near the place and not in, the choice is not "in".
A city — "in" prefered
Let's meet at 11 in Atlanta (ngram)
A public park — much more often "in"
Let's meet at 11 in ...
As a native speaker I would say you could use either. To me "potential for" means the possibility of it working.Potentially it might work but it might not. Using "potential of" means to what extent it could be used. For example, how many people it might benefit, how it might reduce cost, how it might attract business, etc.
Simply googling 'define from' returned a second definition being
indicating the point in time at which a particular process, event, or activity starts
So the usage of 'from' that you're using is acceptable semantically. There is the question of pragmatics, still, which would indicate that most of your example sentences don't really sound natural. In my ...
At denotes location, so it is incorrect to use at while stating that you want to work in the organisation as an employee. If your motive is to inform that you are going to work at the location of the organisation then you should use at instead of in. So, it would be better to use in if you are referring to the organisation not location.
to get something off someone = to get it from someone, forcibly or not
to get something off of someone is like from someone but suggests either force or subterfuge.
to get something out of someone = to manage to get something from someone when the person is not enthusiastic about giving it up.
I couldn't get an answer out of him. [He would not give me an ...
The difference is in the preposition.
When you elect someone as President (say), they become President.
However, if you want to use to then you can only elect someone to the office of President — that is, the status, the position of being President. They are elected and moved into that position.
The people elected Peter Bloggs as President.
The people ...
The best options are:
to restructure your sentence so to avoid so many definite
to use the indefinite article if it does not substantially alter
Three examples are as follows.
The three-month period was chosen to limit the use of study patients'
The three-month period was chosen to limit using the ...
I can understand why you find this a bit confusing, different prepositions are used for time as the time period becomes shorter and more precise. With periods longer than a day the preposition used is "in". For instance: "In the 21st century", "In 2020", "in September 2020", "in the first week of September 2020&...
To answer the title question: no (except colloquially in a particular British dialect, as someone pointed out in another post).
The problem with using "In the mid-1990s" or "In the middle of the 1990s", as previously suggested, is that "1900s" is itself ambiguous, meaning either "1900–1999" or "1900-1909".
Americans do not use “in the mid of” or “the mid of.” An American writing teacher would grade one down for using either because they are incorrect for Standard American English.
Although many Americans do not write or say “in the midst of,” it is a correct phrase, but not for a time period, such as “the mid-1990s.” Instead one might write or say something ...
For the actual answer to the GMAT question, this question is now online as a practice GMAT question. The OP seems to have remembered the choices incorrectly. The correct choices are:
A) in the hopes to ending
B) in the hope to ending
C) with the hope to ending
D) with the hope of ending
E) in the hope to end
The key to answering this question is not ...
I'd say in the hope of + doing (gerund) or with the hope + that + clause (S-V-O)
More people are moving to cities in the hope of finding jobs.
More people are moving to cities with the hope that they will find jobs.
Another consideration for your question is how different prepositions are used in different contexts
e.g. in summer vs. on/at the weekend etc.
While 'belong to' certainly has the meaning of possession, and 'belong on' has the meaning of 'appropriate for', you could also use 'belong in' or 'belong at' depending on the noun it precedes.
e.g. This artefact ...
You are all correct. The key is to not think of the infinitive as a standalone part of speech, but a functioning unit of language. Look at the phrase's function, and it will show the part of speech. It will be a noun, adjective, or adverb.
Noun --> "His job was to help me." (What was his job?)
Adjective --> "There is a file to ...
The reason for that has to be sought in the relation expressed by the preposition and the relations that are applicable to the entity that the word represents.
If we take "in", the fundamental relation is that of position within something, like a container, something that is characterized by volume, mass, rather than by surface, things that have ...