Hi Hassan, the answer is "is". To date you have never climbed a dangerous mountain. The fact remains true. Hence, "was", which relates to the past, cannot be used in your sentence.Read More...

We're happy to see you again, Joshua, and hope that you stick around. I think that you will find yourself getting used to the new system in no time. Just keep asking questions. Your English will thank you for it.Read More...

Hi, Ruifeng, I don't think I've ever heard anyone use "pile of Ns" with plural conjugation. "Group of Ns," however, can take either singular or plural conjugation. The same question goes FOR "group," you could have said.Read More...

Hi, Gustavo, It is now clear to me why the article writer used the past perfect in the relevant sentence instead of the present perfect. Thank you again for you help.Read More...

Hello, Coco, Sentence (2) is fine, but you are right that there is something wrong about (1). What is wrong is that there is a conflict in the tenses. "Goes" (present tense) should be "went" (past tense). You can say: Hardly a day went by that I didn't think about her. Hardly a day goes by that I don't think about her.Read More...

Marvellous! Thanks, David.Read More...

Thank you both very much, The problem seems to be sentence '3'. At first, I really thought it could work, although I knew that I was sort of pushing things! The more I think about it, the more I have doubts. Gustavo doesn't seem to have a particular problem with it, but David does. If I understand David's reply correctly, the problem with '3' is ' her'. That word implies that the ring did really belong to her. But then we learn that it didn't. There seems to be a contradiction. I thought...Read More...

I appreciate it.Read More...

Hi, Kis: I've never used Euros. If "€" were "$," $7.99 would be pronounced "seven-ninety-nine" or "seven dollars and ninety-nine cents." If you want to know how to pronounce "€7.99" in English, you should ask an English speaker who uses Euros.Read More...

Thank you very much, Gustavo and David, The other thread was not in my files. I just added it. I had forgotten about it actually, or else I wouldn't have asked this question. There is nothing to unveil. The sentences sound bad and are bad! My apologies! Respectfully, NaviRead More...

Subhajit, you say "how I should use gerunds." The point is that sometimes you don't need to use a gerund, or any kind of word in particular, if you want to sound natural. Language does not work that way, enabling the use of any category of word at all times. When the (implicit) subject of the gerund is the same as that of the main clause, it is incorrect, or in the best case extremely awkward, to use the possessive as in your second sentence above. Why should you use it? In this other case...Read More...

Hi, Kis, Yes, they are both correct. I would find it much more natural not to use "will" in that particular context. So I prefer (a), but both are correct. There are no differences between them in that case. But take a case like this: "I hope he is there." Without context, "is" can refer to the present or the future. There is no way, however, to suppose that "will be" in the sentence "I hope he will be there" can refer to the present. Thus, "will" can remove ambiguity sometimes.Read More...

Thank you so much.Read More...

Thanks a lot. I really appreciate it so much. Would you please tell me more about "fused psrticiple".Read More...

David, Your "Object" example, of course, can also refer to the meat of the turkey rather than the bird itself. Hence (or is that "hens"?), the second sentence in the example could say that they "ate some fresher turkey instead". Mostly, though, I wanted to bring back a similar example that you shared with me years ago, which was: I think that you asked me at the time which of these meanings came to mind: But, of course, a turkey can't be hungry if it's stuffed. I understand that this doesn't...Read More...

Thank you, Gustavo.Read More...

David says: There is something very strangely beautiful about that sentence. He uses a double negative to speak of the omission of an omission. I agree with David completely, but I can't really say that avoiding the lack of absence of ellipsis would work nearly as well. I'm sure you know, but since it wasn't spelled out, "for good", as David uses it, means "permanently". I've never quite understood how it came to mean that, since it doesn't seem to be related to any other meaning of "good"...Read More...

Hi David, Could you please explain what you meant here? Thank you very much for your answer.Read More...

Hello, Azz, In your first set of sentences (a) to (c) (next time, please use different letters if you provide new examples within the same thread), I think "most interesting" can only mean "extremely interesting." The superlative will require the pronoun "one," a generic noun like "thing" (or "person"), or the presence in the immediately preceding context of a noun which might be considered to be implicit in the sentence that follows, for example: A: What was the most interesting thing you...Read More...

Hi, Azz, All the sentences are grammatical, but only the first two make sense. Sentences (c) and (d) are semantically infelicitous and therefore incorrect. You could fix (d) by changing "but" to "and" or by using as separate sentence. (d1) I talked to the engineer who was to have fixed the system. He said he couldn't do it. The perfective infinitive "was to have fixed" implies that he didn't actually do it. The second sentence now explains what happened: he wasn't able to fix the system.Read More...

Thank you, Gustavo, so much.Read More...

Hi, Azz, I don't think the sentences are correctly punctuated because, unlike "it," "this" cannot merely work as an anticipatory subject (introducing the real infinitival subject that comes at the end). The clause starting with "this" is a complete sentence. If you want to clarify what "this" refers to, you should make the infinitival clause an apposition. A comma could help, as you suggest (but I'm not sure it's the best solution): a'. This is a terrible thing, not to be able to see him.Read More...

Thank you very much, Gustavo, for clarifying this.Read More...

Thank you, David, so much. Now I understand it clearly.Read More...

Hi, Ruifeng, No, the reason for the singular form does not have anything to do with "or." However, the relative clause does implicitly apply to the first disjunct. The sentence may be regarded as a reduction of the following: A prefix is a letter that comes at the beginning of a word or a group of letters that comes at the beginning of a word .Read More...

Thank you, David.Read More...

Hello, Dee, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange! May I ask what the invitation is for? Are you trying to invite your neighbors over for drinks to celebrate Christmas?Read More...

Hello, Ayman El-Nemr, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. I agree with you that "is working" is the correct answer, as it denotes a temporary habit: T om hardly ever works, but these days he is working hard. Where I don't agree with you is that "works" would be suitable if the first verb were in the past. The point is that the adverbial "these days" requires present continuous or present perfect continuous: I'm working hard these days. I've been working hard these days.Read More...

Hi, Subhajit, I can't imagine any native speaker using that sentence without a modifier following "pen." (Incidentally, did you notice that the sentence I just finished writing contains "any" with a singular count noun? ) You could say: I don't have any pen that matches that description.Read More...

Certainly, Coco. I find "despite her tiredness" to be slightly awkward in comparison with "despite being tired," but it's perfectly grammatical.Read More...

Good find, Ruifeng. Churches are tax-exempt, that is to say, they do not pay taxes. If you declare you are a church (or declare yourself a church ), you will be able to evade taxes. That poster offers you a way to pay less taxes without having to resort to the artifice of declaring you are a church in your tax return (which is the form where you declare your income on the basis of which income taxes will be assessed).Read More...

Thank you very much Doc v. I'm a bit curious about how you would get the answer expected by the publisher. Anyway, thanks again. I really appreciate it.Read More...

That you add the phrase "in the event that" is so excellent and so clear. It solved my problem. Thank you so much.Read More...

Thanks for your help.Read More...

Thank you so much, David and Gustavo! I 've attached the surrounding sentences. You're right, it's from a Korean Textbook. (The story is about a Indian American girl, Neha Gupta.) ...... She wanted to help with their education. Instead of just feeling sorry for the girls, she decided to do something. Some people said, “If you were an adult, you could do it, but you’re just 9 years old. Do you really think you can change anything?” What they said, however, didn’t stop her. When she went back...Read More...

Hello, Sahar Mehraji, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. That sentence you quoted is anything but vague. Are you sure you understand all the words and grammatical structures?Read More...

Subha, These are good questions. I see by your examples that you have already grasped the fact that "any" tends to be used mostly in questions or negative statements. It can also be used in conditionals. Both are acceptable, but I recommend using "any". Without it, it is possible for the other to respond: 1a: No, I don't have "children". I have one child. It would be more natural in this context to say: 2a: I don't have a car . I go to college by bus. As with (1), I find the presumably...Read More...

Thank you,sir .Read More...

Hi, Rasha, This is not a question about language but about legal terminology. Since I teach legal and financial English, I can help you, but please consider this an exception. Our main focus here is to clarify doubts about grammar and general language. An organization (in BrE "organisation") is a general word for entity. It can be private or public, for profit (a "business organization") or not for profit. An association has a civil, non-commercial nature. It can be a club, an alumni...Read More...

Hi, Azz, They are all grammatically correct, and they mean basically the same thing. The use of "more and more" emphasizes the ongoing incremental improvement. Also, with "more and more," the phrase "all the time" is a bit redundant.Read More...

I particularly liked your examples above, DocV, as they illustrate very clearly that it is the noun (singular mass or plural count) which is focused on as the head of the phrase that will determine the number of the verb.Read More...