All Forum Topics

Hi, I think both options are wrong. Only these would work, in my opinion: - He is walking to work as he has sold his car. - He is walking to work as he sold his car last Monday . - He has been walking to work since last Monday , when he sold his car. - He sold his car last Monday , and has been walking to work ever since / since then.Read More...

I agree. I'd say that it is the inversion following "nor" that causes a break between both coordinate clauses. A comma is required between a clause in normal order and an inverted one. Here are some more examples taken from the Longman Dictionary: - I don’t expect children to be rude , nor do I expect to be disobeyed. - They couldn’t understand it at the time , and nor could we . - Worrall was not at the meeting , nor was he at work yesterday . The same happens if the second clause is...Read More...

Thank you very much, DocV, I do appreciate it, but I wasn't sure it was really there. Respectfully, NaviRead More...

Wow! It is good to have DocV around! I had completely forgotten the soundtrack album! Thank you all very much! NaviRead More...

Hi, Shivam Raj, That word is not in any dictionary that I know of, though I don't want to discourage you from using it. Prefixes can often be added to verbs. Both ways of spelling the word are correct, and there is another option as well. You could use a diaeresis above the o : deöperationalize.Read More...

To clarify what the Longman editor meant, it is not that such sentences are ungrammatical. They are perfectly grammatical. But they are grammatical with respect to a meaning that the speaker did not intend. Analogously, the sentence "He punched him" is perfectly grammatical, provided that the referent of "him" is different from the referent of "he." It is ungrammatical if "him" is to refer to the same person as "he": He punched him. ≠ He punched himself.Read More...

Hi, Ruifeng, The simple past would have a totally different meaning. The speaker means to refer to the present, not to the past. The simple present is being used instead of the present perfect ("You have brought news") or the present progressive ("You are bringing news"). The usage of the simple present here is the same as the one that we often hear in live sports commentary. It is a specialized use of the simple present. He shoots! He scores! The crowd goes wild!Read More...

Thank you very much, DocV, I thought that '4' might mean the same as '3' as well as being a self-contradictory statement. Apparently it has only one meaning and that meaning is self-contradictory. Gratefully, NaviRead More...

Hello, Ahmed and DocV, I would think that we can use two other prepositions in context NO. 2; 2b: Many websites allow people to download videos on their computers. 2c: Many websites allow people to download videos onto their computers.Read More...

Ahmed, I'm sure I've seen this question before. Both are correct but they mean different things. (A) can mean that she does programming, editing, data entry, etc, and uses computers to facilitate her job. (B) means that she is a technician who builds and tests the computers themselves, repairs them, or performs maintenance on them. DocVRead More...

Hi, Azz, "for women to be treated equally with men" is an event, and the passive renders the first interpretation unlikely. I think the sentence can only be interpreted as meaning: - There is a long way for this to happen.Read More...

Hi, Poet20, "Noise" can be used as a countable noun and as an uncountable noun. In "What a weird noise!," it is countable. In "What weird noise!," it is uncountable.Read More...

Hi, Mimichan, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange! Yes, "sure" is an adjective there. As for proof, what other type of word were you tempted to think it was?Read More...

Hi, Kuen, The speaker is saying that, to him, life would be unbearable without peanut butter. "Life" refers to the burdens of life, or to the burden of life itself. An unbearable burden is a burden that cannot be borne. "Make life bearable" here means "make an unbearable burden (or unbearable burdens) bearable." Grammatically, the structure is the same as the one we find in sentences like "He made it red," "She makes him happy," etc.Read More...

Hello, Lauraaliali, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. I don't think the difference between "for" and "by" in adverbials of time indicating deadlines is a BrE/AmE issue. Both are correct but slightly different. While "for" introduces the due date on which some task needs to be completed, "by" means "no later than": - Could you finish this for 5? ( Delivery is expected to take place at 5.) - Could you finish this by 5? (Delivery is expected to take place anytime no later than 5, or at 5 at...Read More...

Sadude, Welcome to the Grammar Exchange. I can't help but wonder why this question should be so important, but I'll answer it anyway. "Spawn" here means "child" or "offspring", and as such needs a proper possessive: "the Devil's spawn". DocVRead More...

Thank you for your help anyway, Gustavo!Read More...

Thank you very much for explaining in such detail. Much appreciated.Read More...

No, but using past perfect there would make the sentence unnecessarily heavy.Read More...

Kuen, As the Urban Dictionary says, the person has a history of unreputable actions. Not just one action, but actions plural. They might not have been crimes per se ; they may have been acts of dishonesty or betrayal that were unethical but still within the law. The point is that because of his checkered past, you should take extra care when deciding whether or not to trust him. I can't imagine any way that this term could be used to mean something positive about a person. DocVRead More...

Ahmed, 1: They had been staying with us since the previous week. Meaning: At the time of the event in question, they were staying with us, and had been since some time during the previous week. 2: They had been staying with us for the previous week. Meaning: At the time of the event in question, they were no longer staying with us, but had stayed with us the entire previous week. DocVRead More...

Hi, Ahmed Imam Attia, IMO, both are grammatically correct. Using 'dreaming', the emphasis lies on the progressive meaning, i.e. it refers to a present state then. Using 'to + inf.', the emphasis lies on something that would happen (in the near future).Read More...

Ahmed, I agree with you, and I especially appreciate your taking the time to research Rachel's comments from years past. DocVRead More...