October 2020

You use either please or kindly, they are both polite, using both in a sentence is like more emphasising on politeness. Here is a good article i found you can read more about https://bigben.academy/please-and-kindly/Read More...

Thank you.Read More...

Regarding the word while Regarding the word while, I've used it above to indicate something happening at the same time. If I was going to use it to mean "on the other hand" or "alternatively", would I need a comma? For example: Child A went to live in FL, while Child B stayed in NYS.Read More...

Thank you very much.Read More...

If I wanted to use "such that" when there is already a current custody agreement, am I correct in writing the following: "The mother is filling against the father for a modification to the current custody order concerning the subject child, such that temporary custody shall be with the mother and the father's rights of visitation shall be suspended."Read More...

It sounds odd because, as I said in the explanation I transcribe below, "very much" works better with transitive verbs in any form (affirmative, interrogative and negative), but only in the negative with intransitive verbs:Read More...

That question asks about the object of the preposition. Some people would say that "him" in "to him" may be considered the indirect object in "I told the story to him." I reserve the term "indirect object" for the placement of "him" in "I told him the story," which means the same thing as "I told the story to him." Another name for the structure found in "I told him the story" is the double-object construction. Generally, when I am blogging for people such as you, who are tempted to call...Read More...

It means: " What, accordingly, does that (i.e., that fact) imply that you are? "Read More...

Hello, Chante, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. "were" in both sentences (as well as other verbs in the past in similar constructions) is a case of what we call "unreal past," or "past subjunctive": verbs in the past tense that express present or future time .Read More...

Great find, Gustavo. I just found a pdf of the book itself here . Yes, and the applicable Eckersley rule for this exercise is Rule 1 at the bottom of page 58: " [The definite article is not used:] Before abstract nouns used in a general sense, e.g. - Life is very hard for some people (NOT: 'the life'). We will have freedom or death (NOT: 'the freedom,' etc.). " I agree. Incidentally, it is much more common now, at least in American English, to speak of "public opinion" instead of "world...Read More...

(1) expresses a real possibility. (2) and (3) express a remote or hypothetical probability.Read More...

P.S. An answer key to your 60-year-old grammar book does exist (click here ) and can be purchased from some sellers who carry obscure out-of-print books.Read More...

I agree with David. In the future, Me_IV could say: - I'll be available for the next three hours.Read More...

Yes, that is also possible. I am simply reporting on a usage pattern that, as a native speaker, I am aware exists and is quite prevalent, whether or not grammar books have recognized it. I have seen no condemnation of the usage. Here are some examples from The Corpus of Contemporary American English : "It almost sounds as if you'd rather he not go ." "We should tell him. I'd rather he learn about the Borg from us ." "There's a file on there I'd rather she not see ." "I'd rather it not come...Read More...

That's very interesting, and I agree with you that the numbers or quantities of children and mothers having health problems now and 100 years ago are being compared. I think this also works, doesn't it?: 2.a. Now fewer children and mothers have health problems than those who/that had health problems 100 years ago. Excellent find, David. Your search couldn't have been more thorough. The sentence above sounds to me as if "more" had been moved from an adverbial to an adjectival position: -...Read More...

I apologize for disturbing you, but I wrote my comment below below the thread I referred to but I thought you hadn't read it, so I wrote my comment on a new post, I repeat my apology for you.Read More...

Hi, Ilko, Yes, it is. There were many chairs and tables (set / that were - had been set) out on the lawn.Read More...

Thank you.Read More...

"I needed people to share my life" does not mean "I needed people to share my life with." "I needed people to share my life" can mean either (a) or (b): (a) The speaker needs for people to share his or her life (with others). (b) The speaker needs people to accomplish his or her purpose of sharing his or her life (cf. "I needed people in order to share my life"). There is a sense in which reading (b) may be seen to imply "I needed people with whom to share my life." But it's on a pragmatic,...Read More...

Any other thoughts?Read More...

Hi, Tony, Words like hundred, thousand, million, billion only take an "s" when indefinite: - He earned millions of dollars. - He earned 10 million dollars.Read More...

Hi, May123, The rule is simple: count nouns (e.g. cow, egg ) can be used generically in the plural (with the zero article) or in the singular with the indefinite or the definite article (the indefinite one being more usual), while non-count nouns (e.g. milk, butter, cheese ) can only be used generically with the zero article. - Milk, butter and cheese are dairy products. - Cows give us milk, and hens give us eggs . - A cow (or the cow ) is an animal.Read More...

Thank you very much. Completely got it.Read More...

Like you said, sentence 1 means both (a) and (b) - those are just different ways of saying the same thing. The book can only improve your Italian by being used. 2b is unneccessary. 'Who is' is not needed.Read More...