December 2021

Hello, JunYoungLee, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. You have given possible answers to a question without presenting the question itself. Please tell us what the question is that you are proposing answers to.Read More...

Hello, Yd, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. I think that the generic meaning of do it is "perform" ( do ) "the action" ( it ). If you feel uncomfortable having someone read to you , or if you simply don't have someone you can ask to do ( perform ) it ( the action of reading to you ) , you can have your computer read your essay to you.Read More...

Hi, Gustavo, appreciate on yours and you're absolutely right with the comment - It is the pronoun "that" that refers to a past event . Meantime, could I invite your opinion on my previous inquiry, which is most important to me - 2. Meantime, when we consider the usual expressions to reduce a relative clause into an infinitive phrase, is there a possibility to shorten the ‘amount of sunlight which is allowed in ’ above into ‘amount of sunlight to be allowed in ’ with following reason, even if...Read More...

Hi, Azz—I agree with your interpretations of (c) and (d), and with your main observation about (a) and (b), namely, that an analogous distinction does not hold between them. Regarding your "unless"-qualification to your interpretation of (a) and (b), if we were talking about "things like letters, messages, etc., that could only come from someone," "anything of him" would naturally be "anything of his " instead.Read More...

Hello, Ahmed Imam Attia—I agree with the answers Ahmed_btm has given you. It would be more natural to use (1) in a situation in which none of the schools had started applying E-learning at the time of speech, and (2) in a situation in which some of the schools had started doing so by the time of speech. As to whether (2) implies that the process will have been started and continued by 2030, or that the process will have been started but have ceased by 2030, the sentence can be read in either...Read More...

Yes, both positions are possible: (1) She always used to come home for Christmas. (2) She used to always come home for Christmas. There is even a third possibility: (3) She used always to come home for Christmas. However, the third possibility is rarely found in today's English. One reason for this is that "used to" is normally pronounced "usta," as if it were one word. Technically, (2) could imply that now she only sometimes comes home for Christmas, especially if "always" were emphasized...Read More...

Hi, Deepcosmos—It is perfectly natural, native, and grammatically correct to say "Did you hear the song (that/which) they played on the radio" and "Did you hear them play the song on the radio?" However, the meaning of the two sentences is different. The question "Did you hear them play the song on the radio?" is ambiguous without context; it could be a yes-no question related to either "the song" or "on the radio." The question "Did you hear the song (that) they played on the radio?" is...Read More...

Hello, Navi—I find all four of your examples here to be grammatical, though not nearly as natural-sounding as your paraphrase ("It is easy to cause this machine to malfunction") or this: "Causing this machine to malfunction is easy." Notice that, in relative clauses, we can extract the direct object in tough -movement constructions without extraposition: "This is a topic that (it) is easy/hard to write a paper about [_]." Notice, too, that we can extract the direct object of causal...Read More...

Hi, I agree with Ahmed towab that, for "prejudice" to work, there should be a modal of obligation or some other word or phrase indicating that only women are supposed to do the housework. I understand Ahmed_btm's point about the cultural issue in question, but I don't think the structure "it's a stereotype to think ..." works very well. If you look up "stereotype," you'll see the term refers to the person being seen or identified from a certain perspective. A good sentence with "stereotype"...Read More...

In this thread you can find two examples, one where the conjunction "that" cannot be omitted: - When people look back on 2001, what tools will they marvel that we functioned without? and one where the conjunction "that" can be omitted: - When people look back on 2001, what tools will they say ( that) we functioned without? This has to do with the pattern of those verbs. While "marvel" always takes "that" ( marvel that ), "say" can do without it ( say (that) ).Read More...

As I said, they are similar. The sentence with "much of a difference" sounds slightly more tentative to me, as if the person did not want to say "much difference" straightaway, but this might be a personal impression. I see a similar difference in nuance between: - There was a bit of a difference. and - There was a small/some difference. My opinion is that "not much of a" and "a bit of a" function as lexical hedges.Read More...

Thank you very much.Read More...

Thank you.Read More...

Thank you, Gustavo. AppleRead More...

Hi, Treasure, is not an English word, let alone a good title for any thread on a grammar forum. You should be more specific. It is also good to start with a question, like: Could you help me choose the correct option? If you neglect to follow our guidelines , you might not get an answer next time.Read More...

Oh. Thanks for the clear answer. Now I've understood.Read More...

Hi, Omar Ahmed, Yes, there is. Some people see that sentences with danglers are acceptable since the meaning can be deduced, but this is still technically ungrammatical, especially in modern careful writing. Garner mentions that Some danglers, though, are acceptable because of long-standing usage. "Among the commonest of these are according, assuming, barring, concerning, considering, given, judging, owing to, regarding, respecting, speaking, taking (usu. account of, into account)."Read More...

Thank you.Read More...

Hello, learner, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. As you can read in our guidelines , we do not provide proofreading services but can help you if you there is any specific doubt in relation to which you need our guidance.Read More...

Hi, Emad Raheb, The best answer I can give is that 'messaging some clients' is a participle clause complementing 'busy' . According to 'A Comprehensive Grammar Of The English Language', page 1230, under the subtitle 'Adjective Complementation by an -ing participle clause: "Busy is followed by an -ing participle clause without subject." - Margery is busy writing letters. ____________________________________________________________________________________ On the other hand, some people may...Read More...

Hello, David, thanks a million!!Read More...

But 'until I have had' would also be enough without the 'shall', wouldn't it? Thank you, David.Read More...

Thanks a lot. I have learnt a new expression. I wonder if there are still other expressions to express the same idea.Read More...

Dr. David, Millions of thanks as usual. I have learned it. TatsRead More...