Usually we say that the person who is "pointing" with his/her eyes is signaling in that direction (with his/her eyes). For example, "He signaled with his eyes that there were guards standing in the corner".
Other phrases that you could use are, for example:
1. He indicated that ...
2. He gazed to the left to show that ...
Feel free to use any other ...
I think it depends on the question asked or info you want to convey. I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to English grammar and I am not a native English speaker, but look at the following example:
(If you will look at these sentences, it seems that all of them say the same thing. But if you analyze them, what they convey seems different)
Mr. X is ...
The migrant workers during Covid 19 were mistreated by the state governments by not giving them food and shelter.
The ill-treatment on the animals will invite heavy panalties or even jail.
Mistreatment means behave wrongly.
ill- treatment means behave cruelly.
This is an area where usage has been changing, and may still be changing.
Many people use the subjunctive form after verbs that demand or suggest: demand, insist, recommend, advise, require; but others don't. That form is more common in formal than informal contexts, and more used in American English than British.
(Besides the simple present, which some ...
*I sold the car, sold not I?
I sold the car, didn’t I?
*Sold I a car?"
Have I sold/Did I sell a car?
I have a car, haven’t I?
I have a car, don’t I?
Have I a car?
Have I had a car?
Did I have a car?
is it really correct to say that the NICE properties are "the four syntactic characteristics that distinguish auxiliary verbs from lexical verbs ...
Will is a modal verb, and besides being used for situations in the future, it has modal meaning(CaGEL 188-194):
epistemic (what is possible or probable)
She will beat him in under an hour.
volition (what one is willing to do or desires)
I will solve this problem.
He will lie in bed all day, reading trashy novels.
deontic (what is ...
The difference is between a to-infinitival as a relative clause, and a gerund-participial complement to preposition to.
As a relative clause, the key could be subject and take agent role in the situation:
the key to choose wisely = the key which chooses wisely
?the key chooses wisely
It would seem a bit odd to put an inanimate object in the agent ...
They are both correct.
"My favorite thing to smell is flowers," means that you like the smell of flowers in general.
"My favorite things to smell are flowers," hints more at your sticking your nose into actual blooms. AmE
There are certain contexts where the verb seed is more appropriate than sow. One example is seeding rainclouds. Here, what is being scattered in the raincloud is not seeds, but crystals of some chemical that serves as a nucleus for a water droplet.
Technically speaking, there are crops whose seeds are planted in a straight row (e.g.: sunflower and corn) and crops whose seeds are scattered in the field (e.g.: wheat and barley), hence the two different terms in agriculture...
Hope this helps
Your example doesn't seem to be a stative sense of the word "taste". But it's certainly possible to use stative verbs in the past tense:
John felt sick yesterday.
And to use a stative sense of "taste":
When we ate the cake, we tasted the chocolate frosting.
It can also be used in the future:
After you eat dinner you will feel full.
And in perfect ...
When you relate two or more items with "or", you use whichever form matches the item nearest the verb. If the nearest item to the verb (which is almost always the latter or last item) is singular, you use a singular verb form. This applies no matter how many items are joined.
Contrast to "and", which is always plural because the two or more items joined all ...
How about logicalize? From M-W:
logicize: to make logical : convert to logical form, e.g. logicized the argument
While logicalize is obviously similar to @Noah's answer, "to logicalize a conversation" seems a natural way to describe "the turning of a conversation into a logical conversation".
Wish will often apply to hypothetical situations. That is to say situations that aren’t real (yet).
E.g. I wish I were a millionaire.
In the phrase
I wish I could, but I don’t want to
the context is important as the second half of the sentence could be referring to a consequence of having the wish granted.
A: Do you want to buy a ...
How about inundate? From M-W:
inundate: to cover with a flood, overflow
Synonyms include drown, flood, submerge, submerse, swamp. Inundate is more general than flood.
Marshlands, bogs, and swamps are all the result of an area being inundated by water for one reason or another, e.g., tides, seasonal flooding of low-level areas, precipitation, etc.
1) These teachings stood untouched throughout generations.
2) These teachings stayed untouched throughout generations.
Neither one is idiomatic; throughout is incorrect with an indefinite temporal phrase like generations. If you really want to use throughout, you need a definite term like the middle ages or the sixteenth century. With an indefinite ...
It is a figurative usage of leverage that suggests the improvement of something:
To improve or enhance: "It makes more sense to be able to leverage what we [public radio stations] do in a more effective way to our listeners" (Delano Lewis).
The sense is that the developers are racing to improve, make more effective, these ...
The question is: What is the subject of keep?
(1) to help [ ___ keep you safe and secure ]
(2) to help you [ ___ keep safe and secure ]
In the first it is not clear what the subject of keep is without more context or the addition of some further element. In two, the understood subject is you. Compare:
(3) to help you [ ___ keep yourself safe and ...
To clarify, "would" simply means that something is conditional. Obviously, conditional actions need a certain criteria to be met before being executed. So, yes, in a sense, "would" will always mean that something is going to happen – but it doesn't necessarily have to happen; you could be describing something in the past. Let me explain:
If you are ...
'recover' has (at least) two similar but distinct meanings.
One is as an intransitive verb meaning 'to return to a normal condition from a bad one'.
I've had three family members recover (from an illness).
The other is as a transitive verb meaning 'to receive back, to find something lost'. in the following it is used passively:
I've had three family ...
Fever is a symptom of infection, caused by an immune system response to the infection. You can simply tell your friends, "Sorry, I've been sick and want to wait until I'm sure it's safe." With the coronavirus pandemic happening, I'm sure they will understand. In the above scenario, don't feel like you need to communicate to them they you've had a fever. The ...
"No thanks, I just got over a cold." (Depends on what caused the
fever of course.)
"No thanks, I'm a bit under the weather."
"No thanks, I'm getting over something."
Source: I'm a native English speaker.
Both the OP's sentences make syntactical and grammatical sense, but the meanings are different. This is because the meaning of "recover" depends on whether it's being used as a transitive or intransitive verb. (See definitions and plenty of examples of both in the Cambridge Dictionary)
As an intransitive verb, "recover" means to become well (He recovered ...
Given your examples, I would interpret recover as related to a condition - illness, fatigue, etc. recovered would be construed as found.
You could probably remove 'have had' as this feels like repetition/tautology.
A simple fix, to help to clarify, would be to add relevant tense and noun:
I have three family members that recovered from cancer.
I have ...
Your verb here is seems, so you need to retain that somehow to keep the sense. Let's try this . . .
Before: It seems a reasonable supposition. (supposition is a noun)
After: It seems reasonably supposed. (seems supposed is a passive
I will alter the words of the sentence as little as possible.
It seems a reasonable supposition.
They supposed something reasonably.
To address a comment, I am providing a detailed analysis of the wording I chose.
My interpretation here is based on the second sense of supposition:
2 : the ...
Without knowing the context more fully, this is a bit of a guess, but here goes:
The fact that the phrase describes the people building snow forts together leads me to think the entire description is during winter. Given the right conditions, snow can form a soft surface to jump onto.
The sentence definitely means the people jumped off the shed roof onto ...
The rule is that if you have stress on the first syllable, but not the second one- travel, parcel, cancel etc (note: in all these words, the first syllable is stressed on, but the second one receives no stress, or less stress), you drop the second L if it is AmEn. So it’s- traveler, traveling, traveled; parceling, parceled; canceling, canceled. Otherwise, if ...
Abound is a verb, even if it isn't doing what we might consider an "action". A good similar verb would be exist.
Abound really isn't used that frequently though. I (incorrectly) thought it had a negative tone to it as I've only used it ways such as:
Defects and glitches abound in Billy's project that is already too expensive.
Note abound could be replaced ...
Surprisingly, middle (verb) is not found in Lexico, or in Merriam Webster. Those two references usually cover "across the pond" differences in semantics.
a middleman (noun) is...
an intermediary or agent between two parties especially : a dealer, agent, or company intermediate between the producer of goods and the retailer or consumer
You'd not start a sentence with 'presuppose'.
Suppose that A is true. Then B follows.
Suppose that x is an odd number. Then its square is odd too.
Suppose that many people disobey the social distancing rules. Then a second wave will occur.
You rarely use 'presuppose' other than when the contingent truth / state / goal / theory is also stated, and usually ...