All Forum Topics

Terry, Thank you for thinking of me in these bleak times. I have been having to deal with some personal issues and look forward to resuming my usual presence on the forum as soon as possible. I join you and the rest in wishing the best for all of our community and their families. Deus uobiscum, DocV Santa Cruz, California, USRead More...

I strongly favor the perfect form, but context might help. David, would you mind telling us your opinion about a sentence like this one?: - The criminal is suspected of being aided by other individuals in his last two robberies . I personally prefer The criminal is suspected of having been aided ... or The criminal is suspected of relying on the aid of ... , but your view will prevail.Read More...

Hi, Angelica and Gustavo—I agree with your explanation, Gustavo, and would like to add a footnote about "in your face." As a native AmE speaker, I cannot hear "in your face" in isolation without thinking of its idiomatic, slang uses: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+your+face https://dictionary.cambridge.o...english/in-your-face As the Free Dictionary points out, "In your face!" can be used, rather rudely, as a stand-alone interjection, an "aggressive exclamation of triumph." This...Read More...

Marilyn's post is indeed very good. I especially like this assertion of hers, which should be borne in mind at all times: Absolute constructions are effective in the hands of skilled writers writing formal discourse. That said, I think this other assertion applies to the examples in that thread but may not apply to others: In the sentences in that thread the relative does contain background information which cannot be reduced to an absolute clause, but there are cases where that final...Read More...

Hi, ilko, Its meaning is weird and it isn't well written.Read More...

Follow my example and make a try.Read More...

Thanks Gustavo 💖Read More...

Hi, Navi, To the ambiguity I pointed out here as regards the two possible interpretations of the verb "order," we now have to add a third meaning as "put in order." My understanding is that "order" can mean "place an order for the purchase of" and "put in order" in (1) and (3), and "instruct" in (2) and (4).Read More...

Hi, I completely agree with Gustavo that there is a very big difference between 'by the way' and 'after all' when 'after all' is used for contrast. However, in your examples above, 'after all' is used to add further information which supports something you have just said. This information should be totally connected to the subject you are talking about and must be highly valid. Here's an example: I do like her - after all, she is my sister. (Cambridge dictionary) Your first example is found...Read More...

Thanks David 💖💖💖💖Read More...

I agree with Ahmed_btm that all three choices are correct. For what it's worth, it is a bit more common and natural, at least in American English, to speak of fastening or buckling a seat belt in contexts where one is beginning to wear it. When people drive somewhere, they should/have to/need to/must : buckle their seat belt buckle their seat belts fasten their seat belt fasten their seat belts More colloquially, we can say: When you drive somewhere, you've got to buckle up.Read More...

Thank you very much！It helps a lot.Read More...

Thanks for this informative explanation David 💖💖💖Read More...

Thanks Gustavo 💖Read More...

Thanks Gustavo 💖💖Read More...

Thank you ,David. Your explanation helps me a lot to understand this sentence, after read your letter , I've searched more related information in the internet and i guess i has already understand the past continuous tense. About the wrong description of my question that you've mentioned at last letter , is that this sentence yet ? "what is the tense when someone said this sentence?"In that time ,i was trying to describe " i don't understand the grammar of this sentence." But anyway, thank...Read More...

Hi, Navi, I find your sentences to be correct and ambiguous. It might be interesting to analyze the source of their ambiguity: Here, the source of the ambiguity lies in the polysemy of "as" (a sentence relative or a conjunction of manner). The same grounds for ambiguity stated above apply here. Also, (c) and (d) are possible interpretations because the verb "order" can be used as a verb of speaking (similar to "instruct") or as a verb meaning "place an order (for the purchase of some...Read More...

Hi, schmom, The correct paraphrase of (1) is (3) because the use of an adverbial of duration ( a short while ) and the sequence of events require the use of a perfect form of the verb. Notice this other sentence: (4) Dad must have been watching TV when I came into the room. (This expresses simultaneity and can be paraphrased as: I am 95% sure Dad was watching TV when I came into the room = He was probably watching TV when I cam in.) Sentence (1) thus means that, in all likelihood, the...Read More...

Hi, Atef—When a relative pronoun functions as the direct object or the object of a preposition in a restrictive relative clause (one that is not set off by a comma), the relative pronoun does not need to be voiced or written, regardless of whether it refers to a person or a thing.Read More...

Amazing. ThanksRead More...

Hello, Navi, The first two sentences are correct, and the third is not incorrect; (3) is simply a bit awkward. It is generally not a good practice to place "not" between infinitival "to" and the verb it introduces. I can see why you might think that a negated "used to"-clause could be used if the event it described happened but only rarely, since the meaning is presumably just that the subject of the clause was not in the habit of verb-ing. However, the implication (perhaps "implicature"...Read More...

Thanks 💖Read More...

Hi, Navi, "if" does not introduce a conditional in this case but a noun clause (actually, an indirect yes-no question): ' Are you fine?,' she asked me on the phone -> She called me to see if I was fine.Read More...

Hello, Navi—At the very least, those sentences need the adverbial prepositional phrase (PP) following their respective subjects to be set off with commas, to render the PPs parenthetical and give them the quality of afterthoughts: 1a) John, on Monday, talked about Darwin. 2a) Tim, at midnight, called me up to see if I was OK. In (1a) and (2a), the PP set off with commas is not integrated with its clause but stands apart from the sentence as a disjointed appendage clumsily attached. Maybe the...Read More...