June 2022

The first sentence is fine. The second sentence is incorrect without a comma, or a pause in speech, before "since"—except with one very strange meaning. If you use such a "since"-clause or "since"-phrase as a restrictive modifier in a sentence like "He had lived there for two years," the meaning will be that the two-year period of his living there came at some subinterval between his quitting his job and whatever past time is understood in the context. For example: Let us suppose that the...Read More...

Completely agree with you! Emphasis on "Not", sounds more correct.Read More...

I re-read CGEL, Ch. 11 and found there is a difference in terms used. In traditional grammar, including Quirk, et al, that-clauses (content clause) and subordinate interrogative clauses may function as objects of verbs, thus object clauses. But in CGEL terms, they are simply internal complements. Only when the complement is an NP or equivalent to an NP, such as a nominal relative, can it be called a object, and the verb a transitive verb. I find BillJ is precise and sometimes picky on...Read More...

I have a big post on hyphenation ( https://thegrammarexchange.inf...de-when-to-hyphenate ) and I have a big post on quotation marks ( https://thegrammarexchange.inf...e-of-quotation-marks ) and then I have this "loose ends" post above that you're responding to! These are my only three things on my list!Read More...

Hi, Lou, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange, Both are correct, however, 'will' works better here because there is no present reality. It is a kind of exaggeration. 'Are going to' is the logical answer here. It is something that is about to happen, not something in the remote future. Both are correct.Read More...

Thanks so much for this incredible help! I really appreciate it! I'll go with the third option that you mentioned!Read More...

@Ahmed towab @Gustavo, Co-ModeratorRead More...

Hi, Ahmed, Thank you, you helped me a lot!Read More...

Thank you very muchRead More...

Sorry; I overlooked your post. I don't think so. The pro-form "one" is defined by its antecedent, one that is not a full NP, as in the example I gave earlier. Please see my previous answer for the reasons that the pro-form "one" is not a pronoun.Read More...

Hi, Gustavo and David, really thanks for your supports as always.Read More...

Thanks a lot AhmedRead More...

Hi, Annetik, I'd put "perfectly well" in the middle of the verb phrase to avoid cutting off the accusative -ing structure: - I could perfectly well hear them discussing me.Read More...

Excellent point, Gustavo. I suspected that lurking in my grammatical blindspot was some type of acceptable reduced-adverbial-clause -ing construction following "if." You have found it and have described its semantics very well.Read More...

The adverb-adjective parallelism and the dashes make it clear that "extremely" modifies "efficient" and that "easily" modifies "linkable." Would you say "extremely easily linkable"? I wouldn't. "Extremely" could modify an adjective between dashes like "easy-to-use."Read More...

If it said to be a mass noun, it cannot be "also used in the plural." When used in the plural, it is a count noun.Read More...

Thank you!Read More...

Then, what is the meaning as follows. a) The boy(or gury) is not so old that he can go to high school. b) The guy(or boy) is not so old that he can't go to high school. q1) Are those sentence correct? q2) If right, can I rewrite as follows?": a) The boy is not old enough to go to high school. (meaning he must be under 10 year old.) b) The boy is too old to go the high school (meanging he must be over 30 year old )Read More...

Hi, Gustavo, really appreciate. With my sincere RESPECTs to You.Read More...

Hi, David, how could I thank you enough? Gustavo has almost saved me from another headache with a conditional sentence. With my sincere RESPECTs to all of you in G/Exchange~!!Read More...

Hahahaha! I tried, David! Thank you so much, David, for putting this in perspective for me. You've enriched my understanding by saying that Here functions as an interjection that is (and I quote from what you wrote) merely performing an abstract function as a discourse marker and social cue . And thank you for the links. Grateful as always, GilbertRead More...

Hi, Kuen—The sentence has inversion and an incorrect verb form. The subject is "a lot of challenges," which is plural. "A lot of" quantifies "challenges," the plural head of the subject noun phrase: "Unfortunately, a lot of challenges come along with that" / "Unfortunately, along with that come a lot of challenges."Read More...

Hi, Azz and Ahmed—Thank you, Ahmed, for your useful comments on Azz's pair of sentences here. I'm going to take a somewhat different approach because I think that Azz's question here has strictly to do with syntax and logic. In (a), it is unclear whether "all of the precious paintings that were on the walls" were stolen or whether only some of them were. It is also unclear in (a) whether the diamonds were on the walls or whether only the precious paintings were. Syntactically, (a) may be...Read More...