Skip to main content

All Topics

Is the bold grammatically correct? The tense seems potentially incorrect.

See here: https://join.substack.com/p/will-we-end-ourselves Another survey found that more than 50 percent “don’t know where to start” when it came to climate action.Read More...
Again, Andrew, the title is inappropriate. Ask your question in the body of your opening post, not in the title of the thread. The title should indicate the topic. Yes, the tenses are off. The sentence should use "didn't" and "came" (past-past) or "don't" and "comes" (present-present), not "don't" and "came" (present-past).Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

Should I tell my friend that he has a usage error here? The phrase "mitigate against" apparently has a lot of controversy around it in terms of what's proper usage.

See the part in bold: https://ellerman.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Classical-Liberal-JurisprudenceJune2018.pdf Hence, at first glance, the strict logic of the classical liberal free market philosophy would seem to mitigate against ever abolishing any mutually voluntary contract between knowledgeable and consenting adults.Read More...
You need to work on your thread titles, Andrew. The question should be asked in the opening post, not in the title. Titles should be brief and to the point. Here, an appropriate title would be "mitigate against." Titles should inform members and visitors of the grammatical topic dealt with in the thread. Your interest in what you should tell your friend and the fact that there is a lot of controversy have nothing to do with the grammatical topic. Yes, "mitigate against" is frowned upon.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

How should I punctuate around this question?

See here: the only question is “What should we be doing?” our propaganda system forbids us from asking “What should we be doing?” we should ask ourselves “What should we be doing?” You could I guess put a colon before the question in each case, and maybe there's an additional option too.Read More...
In order to answer this question, which is not really about grammar, we need to know which set of arbitrary punctuation conventions you seek to follow.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

Regarding these two cases, should it be "risks" in one case and "risk" in another case? And WHY should there be a difference?

See here: - (B) the risk that Putin will obliterate Ukraine - (D) the risks regarding nuclear warRead More...
Hi, Andrew—In (B), "risk" has a "that"-clause complement, and, because only one risk is spoken of in that clause, only the singular ("risk") makes sense. In (D), "risks" is modified by a prepositional phrase. You can change to the singular ("the risk regarding nuclear war"), but the meaning will be different. Whereas "the risks regarding nuclear war" refers to risks entailed by nuclear war, "the risk regarding nuclear war" refers to the nuclear war itself as the risk.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

itself

Hello, In the following paragraph, which does the bold “itself” refer to “the new effort” or “a planet remade”? Can it work for either? If it works for only one of them, what is the reason? If there is to be an answer to the problem of control, it’s going to be more control. Only now what’s got to be managed is not a nature that exists—or is imagined to exist—apart from the human. Instead, the new effort begins with a planet remade and spirals back on itself— not so much the control of...Read More...
Thank you and I'm very sorry about not using the proper quotation marks. I apologize. I will be very careful when I use a part of the material not my own. AppleRead More...
Last Reply By apple · First Unread Post

Modifier in NP or adjunct

Hi, 1. I wish for a chance to try it. I always thought "to try it" modifies "a chance". Together they make a noun phrase. But someone argues that "to try it" can be a clause-level adjunct, ie adjunct, because it can be fronted: 2. To try it, I wish for a chance. I think even if sentence (2) works, there is a discernable difference in meaning, what do you think? And how would you parse "to try it"?Read More...
Okay, got it. Thank you, BillJ and David.Read More...
Last Reply By Robby zhu · First Unread Post

would with negative past habit

Can't we use ( would ) to express negative past habits.? The English British council says that( we don't normally use would with negative past habits. However, in Macmillan English grammar,the author says that we can use ( would never) and I came across such sentence ( His brother wouldn't ride a bike very often). It seems to me that it is Ok to use the negative form ( wouldn't ) with adverbs of frequency with negative past habit or when it means ( he refused to...) Would you please clarify...Read More...
Thanks I agree with you.It is ok to use negative of would if you were talking about something that didn’t happen, you could say “He was so angry that he wouldn’t even talk to me.” Somebody wouldn't do something = he/she refused to do it: -I tried to warn him, but he wouldn't listen to me. (= he refused to listen) The car wouldn't start. (= it refused to start) I think The British council asserts the idea of not using “would” in negative to talk about past states. Examples: -I used to live in...Read More...
Last Reply By Mohamed Awad said · First Unread Post

You can get a good view by climbing the mountain

1) You can get a good view by climbing the mountain. 2) You can get a good view by climbing mountains. 1) is a result of Google Translation. I did not provide any context for its Japanese sentence. Is the sentence 2) wrong or inappropriate? If so, I appreciate some explanation. Thanks a lot.Read More...
Thank you very much, David! >talking about one specific mountain or about mountains in general That's exactly the thing I wanted to know. I tried to make an example sentence for a generalized statement, but Professor Google failed to produce one.Read More...
Last Reply By ken · First Unread Post

In having

Rishi reveals John was a musical genius as he was expertly able to play the piano without ever having learnt formally. Dear Sir, In the above sentence, what does it mean "having"? What did it use here? Without using "having" the meaning makes sense, right? I believe "having" here used is to get causative meaning. He did not teach the piano without helping from anyone. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks in advance 🙏Read More...
The Grammar Exchange is not an editing service.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

Is this sentence grammatically correct? Look at the tense regarding "if we're honest"; I'm not sure.

See here: https://join.substack.com/p/what-fate-awaits-our-kids We won't—if we're honest—be able to tell them that we didn't know what was coming.Read More...
Andrew, I don't see any problem with the tense. In conditional sentences, the present tense in the condition can refer to the present or to the future.Read More...
Last Reply By Gustavo, Co-Moderator · First Unread Post

What does the "And" in the second paragraph here "attach" to?

If you have X and then an em-dash and then Y, and then another paragraph that starts with "And", then does the "And" attach to X or to Y? See the "And" below and note that there are two sentences (joined by an em-dash) in the previous paragraph: Our hawks aren’t just going to get a lot of Ukrainians killed—our hawks are also going to “drive millions of people to death by starvation” and “hurtle the burning planet even more rapidly to the sixth mass extinction”. And we all have to choose...Read More...
Hi, Andrew, The "and" at the beginning of the second paragraph is at a syntactically higher level than the conjunction "and" joining the two verb phrases within the predicate of the previous sentence. That initial "and" is equivalent to the conjuncts additionally, furthermore, moreover, besides and is actually joining two paragraphs.Read More...
Last Reply By Gustavo, Co-Moderator · First Unread Post

Past perfect/ Past simple

My uncle ............................. as a sales manager for twenty years, but now he has his own business. A had worked B is working C has worked D worked Our book says "had worked", but I think it is " worked" because the action is ended. It is confusing.Read More...
Thanks.I second that.Read More...
Last Reply By Mohamed Awad said · First Unread Post

very

Can I use "very" in following way ? " I very want to play tennis. " I have read " I want to play tennis very much. " but I think previous sentence is correct, too. What do you think?Read More...
Hi, asmed_btm. I'm convinced! That's why I haven't seen the sentence of "very". Thank you.Read More...
Last Reply By nagy · First Unread Post

A part of vs. part of

Hello teachers, The article "a" I am proud to be a part of a group that... OR I am proud to be part of a group that... Is there a rule? Thanks in advance!Read More...
The following examples, some copied elsewhere, & some from myself, show the usage of "part of" & "a part of" in less disputable ways: You can see this yellow flower only during PART of the year. Change is AN inevitable PART of life. This is only PART, not the entirety, of our youth program this year; John will explain the rest. A PART of the pulley system has fallen off; please check if some other PARTS are missing or not. Well, we can certainly think of other examples, or draw some...Read More...
Last Reply By Peter Ma · First Unread Post

adverb slowly

Hello. Could you please help me? Which of the following is correct? a. She walked towards the spider slowly. b. She walked slowly towards the spider. c. Slowly, she walked towards the spider. d. a, b & c Thank you.Read More...
Thank you, David, for those interesting and thought-provoking comments. I plan to slowly study them. I plan to study them slowly . I do not know the reason, but I prefer the first sentence.Read More...
Last Reply By TheParser · First Unread Post

Intransitive verb

Is the verb "Drown" an intransitive verb? For example: You can drown if you don't have a float. You don't say you can be drowned if you don't have a float. Am I right? And therefore the verb drown can never be passivized.Read More...
Hi, Tony—What do you have in mind by "have a float"? I suspect that this is your awkward, nonnative way of referring to a life vest, a life preserver, or a raft.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post

Reported speech

‘We’re going to the Museum tonight,’ Mohamed told me. a) Mohamed told me that they were going to the museum that night. b) Mohamed told me that they would be going to the museum that night. Dear sir, Could you please tell me which answer is correct? I think “b” is ok.Read More...
Thank you sir. This is a screenshot of the answer of a syllabus, so I was confused I thought that “are going” here” is the shorten form of “ are going to go to”refers to the future.Thanks in advance.Read More...
Last Reply By Mohamed Awad said · First Unread Post

Namely and that are

Are "namely" and "that are" can be used interchangeably in the below sentence and it is grammatically correct.? There are two categories of not for profit organisations, namely or that are charities and other NFP that are not charities e.g. sporting and recreational clubs, community service organisations, cultural and social societies, and professional and business associations. Appreciate if you could shed some lights on this.Read More...
a. Yes, it is necessary. The sentence means: "If you could shed some light on this, I would appreciate it." "Appreciate" is a strongly transitive verb (in this meaning) requiring a direct object. You can't say, "I'd appreciate." b. In the idiomatic expression "shed light on something," "light" is noncount.Read More...
Last Reply By David, Moderator · First Unread Post
×
×
×
×