If I knew you were in casino last night, I would have joined you. Conditional formatting type 2. In what other situation/circumstances do we use past future tense (would have).Read More...
Hi, Tony—That conditional is not type 2 and is not correct. Type 3 is needed: If I had known you were in a/the casino last night, I would have joined you. "Would have" is generally used when making counterfactual inferences with reference to the past, as is done in type 3 conditionals: If I had been there, I would have seen her. If I had had a million dollars, I would have bought that house. If he had paid his bill, they wouldn't have shut off his power.Read More...
Hi, zonzon—I agree with Ahmed_btm that both sentences have the same meaning, in that they both convey the same informational content. That does not mean, however, that either sentence will be equally felicitous and natural in any context in which one of them works well. In (1), the speaker's eating is backgrounded (in the subordinate clause) and the father's phoning foregrounded (in the main clause). In (2), the reverse is true. In order to decide which works better in a given context, you...Read More...
Hi there could anyone please tell me what is the difference between the three bold words and word group? Are they all correct? People and political parties may disagree on many things. But almost every one of us agrees on one thing that/that is/which is global warming is the biggest ever threat to the mankind.Read More...
Hi, subhajit, The second sentence above is ungrammatical, because you need a conjunction "that" to introduce the noun clause that global warming is the biggest threat to mankind . (Notice that "the" is not used before "mankind.") That said, "one thing" requires a non-restrictive clause, so you need "which" after a comma. Please consider: - There is one thing almost every one of us agrees on: that global warming is the biggest ever threat to mankind ⇒ Almost every one of us agrees on one...Read More...
Hi, Emad, It is called the qualifying phrase. From L.G. Alexander: "If the comparison is not clear, then we must use a qualifying phrase after the superlative. Phrases of this kind usually begin with in or (less frequently) of." -.John is easily the tallest boy in our class. - Yesterday was the hottest day of the year. Other fixed prepositional phrases are possible: - It's the oldest trick on earth/ under the sun. For a more specific answer to your question, Swan, page (116) says: After...Read More...
Someone asked me this question: Why do we say something is "popular worldwide" and not "worldwide popular"? In this sentence, is worldwide an adjective, or an adverb? Why does worldwide come AFTER popular? "Kpop is popular worldwide." I wasn't sure of the answer. At first, I thought.. order of adjectives? And then I wondered.. well wait, is worldwide in this instance acting as an adverb?Read More...
Hello, Froggy, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. "Worldwide" is an adverb in such examples. (It is an adjective in a sentence like "Kpop enjoys worldwide popularity .") "Worldwide" does not modify the adjective in "popular worldwide." It modifies the sentence as a whole and may be compared with the adverbial prepositional phrase "across the world." It is popular worldwide. It is popular across the world. Worldwide, it is popular. Across the world, it is popular.Read More...
Sometimes, I am confused whether I should use the active or passive. e.g. The $10K you received on 1 January 2020 is comprised of/comprises of : a. $5000: bonus b. $5000: Your salary payment. Thanks!Read More...
Hello, Tony C—The use of "is comprised of" is widespread and debatable as to its acceptability. That said, the traditional grammatical wisdom here is that you should opt for either " comprises " (not " comprises of ") or " is composed of ." The $5000 bonus and the $5000 salary payment compose the $10,000 that the addressee received on 1 January 2020. That ten-thousand-dollar sum comprises those two five-thousand-dollar financial events.Read More...
Hello people, Is this correct grammar? The baby is cute smiling. The implicit meaning is that when the baby smiles she is cute; In this case, is it wrong? I know theses work: The baby is cute when smiling, or The baby is cute when she smiles. Another example can be: We are at our best fighting. Is the 'when' necessary for grammatical correctness? Thank youRead More...
Hello. Please, which one is correct? Why? - The monastery of St. Catherine has a massive wall from 12 to 18 metres (high - tall) Thank you.Read More...
Hi, Ahmed, It is more common to use 'high' with very wide things like 'mountains' and 'walls'. See: https://speakspeak.com/confusing-words/high-tall https://thegrammarexchange.inf.../high-tall-short-lowRead More...
Hi, I want to know if they mean exactly same. You've already arrived. You've arrived already. I looked up some dictionaries and I found: When "already" is at the end of a sentence, it expresses surprise. Is it always true? Or they are just same to be in the middle of the sentence and at the end of the sentence?Read More...
Hello admin! I have a question here. There are two sentences: - Sugar and water are two essential things for ill people. - Sugar and water is two essential things for ill people. Can you tell which sentence is correct please? I'm still confused because "water" and "sugar" are uncountable nouns but I refer two things at the same time so whether I should use "are" or "is" here.Read More...
1) With Freud, he believed in the existence of unconscious drives. 2) Along with Freud, he believed in the existence of unconscious drives. 3) Like Freud, he believed in the existence of unconscious drives. Does '1' imply that they were associated? Does it imply they were contemporaries? How about '2'? Do '1' or '2' imply that he was an associate or a disciple of Freud's? Gratefully, NaviRead More...
Hi there I ......... go to hospital tomorrow to have my eyes checked. ( must - have to - will have to - have got to ) I think MUST is the answer. What do you think ?Read More...
Hello again, Dr Ahmed—When you say "in such a context," I look around for a context but find none. Again, all of the answer choices are correct, since the exercise does not provide a context. How do you know that the speaker is speaking about something that he arranged for? There is no context supplied in the question. If the context is one in which he is realizing the necessity of doing something tomorrow, or spontaneously choosing to do something tomorrow, "must" and "will have to" are...Read More...
Hi, Cristi—No, businessman is inherently masculine. A businessperson who is a female is a businesswoman . Note that businessperson is also one word.Read More...
Good morning, Sir! I have a question. Could you tell me if the following sentences are grammatically correct and sound natural? 1. I told him that I could not allow him to treat me as though I had been the third wheel. He justified his actions saying that if he had been caught by his teacher, the latter would have confiscated his phone. 2. We have to go to the train station well before his train arrives.Read More...
Hi, Schianu—Is there a specific grammatical question or topic you wish to explore with these examples? The Grammar Exchange is not a proofreading service.Read More...
I agree with Gustavo's answer. I'd just like to add that it is conventional to italicize ship names, just as we italicize book titles: The steamship Titanic hit an iceberg. Titanic , the steamship, hit an iceberg.Read More...
I wanted to use the word"whose" in the following sentence, please kindly confirm if I have used it appropriately and whether it has the same meaning. Prior to opening up a bank account, you would have signed an acceptance and acknowledgement form confirming which entity name it operates under. or Prior to opening up a bank account, you would have signed an acceptance and acknowledgement form confirming whose entity it operates under.Read More...
Hi, Cristi, "open an account" is more usual than "open up an account." I'm not sure what you mean to say with "you would have signed..." Are you trying to say "you should have signed" (reproach) or "you must have signed" (past deduction)? The first sentence is more usual. "whose entity" refers to the owner of the entity ( the entity belonging to whom ) and will only be fine in the unlikely event that you are uncertain about of the owner of the bank you are opening an account with.Read More...
The payment of my kid's school fee is reflected in my bank statement. Why we don't say on my bank statement? Is it because on my bank statement means it is sitting on top of my bank statement? Same things applies to book.Read More...
Help me! Please! There are many words can make a short imperative sentence by itself (ex: Run! / Look! / Sit!), can you explain to me the meaning of the below words when I use them like a short imperative sentences? 1 Choose! 2 Enjoy! 3 Capture! 4 Celebrate! 5 Stay! 6 Finish! 7 Follow! 8 Forget! 9 Calculate! 10 Control! 11 Count! 12 Decorate! 13 Define! 14 Divide! 15 Drag! 16 Draw! 17 Drive! 18 Drop! 19 Explain! 20 Explore! 21 Gulp! 22 Illustrate! 23 Imagine! 24 Investigate! 25 Judge! 26...Read More...
Which are correct: 1) He is the man I have to find the brother of. 2) He is the man of whom I have to find the brother. 3) He is the man the brother of whom I have to find. 4) This is a word I have to find the meaning of. 5) This is a word of which I have to find the meaning. 6) This is a word the meaning of which I have to find. Gratefully, NaviRead More...
- Most private companies, meanwhile, ignored their obligation to provide pensions for their workers.At those that did , allegations of mismanagement and fraud abounded. (From the Economist). Hello, everyone. I'd like to know if: At those that did = At those companies that provide pensions for their workers. or = As those companies that ignored their obligation to... Thanks in advance. If context is needed: Nigeria has spent a decade resurrecting its pension system. Back at the turn of the...Read More...
Hi, Robby zhu—The title of this thread indicates that you think your question has to do with pro-forms. It really has to do with ellipsis. "At those that did" is elliptical for "At those that did [provide pensions for their workers]." While it is possible to have "At those that did [ignore their obligation to provide . . .]," that interpretation wouldn't be appropriate here, for three reasons. First, the nearest verb phrase to the elided one is "provide pensions for their workers." Second,...Read More...
Should I use the alleged or your alleged in the following sentence? You stated that you disposed your property in 2015 but there was no capital gain tax event aros e from the alleged or your alleged disposal of your property reported in your 2015 tax return. Thank you!Read More...
Hello Gustavo, thank you! So basically, I do not believe the person actually disposed of the property and that's why I used "your alleged". If he sold the property, there should be a capital gain tax event reported in his tax return. So the sentence should be worded like this then: a. You stated that you disposed of your property in 2015 but in your 2015 tax return, it did not disclose any capital gain tax event arose from your alleged disposal of a property. or perhaps we can use purported...Read More...
Hello, Would you write: Fighters were scrambled but failed to intercept the enemy aircraft. Or Fighters were scrambled, but failed to intercept the enemy aircraft. Thanks MidgeRead More...
Hi, Midge, and welcome to the Grammar Exchange. Both sentences are correct. The comma is optional. Writers have the option to separate coordinated verb phrases with a comma. Some do. Others don't.Read More...
Does this dialogue sound natural to you? A: Have you got my invitation to like my page? B: Nope, sorry. I get a lot of notifications. It must have gone too below to notice. Send me that again.Read More...
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .