January 2022

Hello, Wael Shaltoot and TheParser, In The Grammar of the English Verb Phrase Volume 1: The Grammar of the English Tense System: A Comprehensive Analysis , Renaat Declerck refers to "this week" as a "multi-zone temporal adverbial," that is, an adverbial that can combine with either the past simple (at some past time during this week) or the present perfect (this week which has not not yet finished). He says that the choice of tense depends on the speaker’s temporal focus. I think both...Read More...

I'd like to wish a late happy new year to David, Gustavo, Navi and all the others here! May you all be happy, healthy, successful and curious! Long Live Grammar Exchange!Read More...

As a general rule, when the object is pronominal it must be placed between the verb and the particle: - I was ready to blow him out but I let him have his day. (from The New York Times ) NOT to blow out himRead More...

Hi, Barry—This informal construction with "meets" is commonly found in descriptions of movies or novels that seem to the describer to be hybrids of other films. Typically, at least one specific film or novel is referred to in the construction. Also, "meets" is generally only used once. In your example, no specific works are referred to, but only types of works; and "meets" is used twice. I analyze the construction as one in which a sentence is used as a noun , and, in a common variation of...Read More...

Thank you AhmedRead More...

Thanks Gustavo, for the story and for those annotations! I think I have actually watched a film with similar plot, where the selected people were gathered in a room and they had to vote for one of them to die, and then the machine guns did their job, something like that.Read More...

Thank u I got itRead More...

Hi, Ahmed Imam Attia, I'd go with '2'. 'Give up' here means to 'admit defeat'. I think '1' could work if you use 'gave in'. '3' doesn't work at all.Read More...

I agree with Gustavo that " in a village among the fields " is better than "in the country among the fields." Since to be among the fields is to be in the country, I think the other version needs a comma: " in the country, among the fields ." Incidentally, if this weren't an exercise, but were an actual attempt to communicate, it is possible to speak of living " in a country village ." We can even speak of living " among the fields in a country village ."Read More...

Hi, Dr Ahmed—From a native-speaking standpoint, both answers are perfectly fine; neither of them is more accurate than the other. They can be used interchangeably: " You have nothing to worry about. He is clever. He {will / is going to} pass the exam. "Read More...

Thank you. On Thu, Jan 6, 2022 at 6:42 PM The Grammar Exchange < alerts@crowdstack.com > wrote:Read More...

Hi, David Thank you so much.Read More...

Thank you again, Andrew, for your kind words. At the moment we have 17,687 members, but I think there are many guests who don't register and pass unnoticed. Since we moved from our old platform a few years ago, member nationalities have expanded immensely, which makes me think we are even more visible than we were in the past. We take this very seriously, but you should note that we do it on an unpaid basis and that, with those of us who answer questions being so few, it's really hard work.Read More...

Yes. Although "at" would not be incorrect, I find "in" to be more precise — the delivery guy will know for sure where to leave the parcel.Read More...

Thanks David! With the example given, should I conceptualize my electronic system as something that I open and put information into or as an object whose exterior I put information onto? Why cant I just say: Please provide your details as I need to add you in our clients portal.Read More...

The quotes are optional in each case, but be consistent.Read More...

Hi, Andrew—Do you aspire to follow a specific code of style conventions, such as APA, MLA, or Chicago? If so, you should consult the respective style manual. If not, either orthographical form is fine, as you have already discovered. I myself dislike the apostrophe there; however, if you like it, I can respect that. If you want to avoid the issue, you can simply write "mid-nineteen-seventies," as the New Yorker does. I consider it the best-punctuated magazine in the U.S.Read More...

Okay, thank you, David.Read More...

Hi, Andrew—Technically, an acronym is a word whose letters each stand for another word. For example, "SCUBA" stands for "Self-Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus," "WASP" for "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant," and AIDS for "Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrom." We use articles with acronyms like the above just as we would with ordinary words like "apple," "car," etc. However, I assume that you mean to ask about initialisms like USA, FBI, CIA, etc. With these, article usage generally varies...Read More...

Hi, David Toklikishvili, There is another possibility here. You can keep the time frame without any change if the proposition is still true. - George said if he goes to Moscow he will see the Red Square. From 'A Comprehensive Grammar Of The English Language', page 1031: "The past subjunctive or hypothetical past is backshifted to hypothetical past perfective if there is a change in time reference. Backshift is optional if the proposition is still valid." - "If I were in England, I would...Read More...

Thank you, David!Read More...

Hello, Alka, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. I agree with Ahmed that "would" is the past of "will" in this type of usage and relates to expectation/prediction/presumption, and with Gustavo that "would" is more tentative than "was" or "were"; indeed, it is more tentative than "will." If someone was using my cell phone, and informed me, "Your phone just dinged" at a time when I often get texted by someone (John), I could say, "That must be John texting me." Or I could say, " That will be...Read More...

Hello again, Apple—Coincidentally, I received an e-mail this morning (from a sales manager at a textbook publishing company) with a sign-off that I had never seen before but really liked. It ties in with your thread. I'll demonstrate it. Season's best, DavidRead More...

Hello, Ahmed Imam Attia—In (1), the causative structure is not being used; "to help you" is an infinitival relative clause, and the meaning is "Was there anyone that you had to help you?" / "Was there anyone who could help you?" In (2), the causative structure is used; the meaning is "Did you cause anyone to help you?" The implication could be "Did you make anyone help you?," "Did you pay someone to help you?," or "Did you ask someone to help you?"Read More...

Thanks for the analysis, David. Yes, when I saw "Twice three is six", it pushed me to think that it's simply a variant of "Two times three is six." Therefore, "two times three" has the same structure as "twice three"-- "three" being the head, "two times" a dependant. "Two times" is a noun phrase, with "times" being the head. I didn't realize they could be semantically the same, but syntactically different. I think of a way to test it: 1* 5=5 One times five equals five. (not "time", I assume)...Read More...