Hi!
I'm doing an exercise on extraposition and existential clauses just now and would like to know if my answers are correct.
The task is as follows:
a) For each underlined clause, give an extraposed counterpart if one is available, or if none is available, explain briefly why.
- Why you put up with it is incomprehensible. - It is incomprehensible why you put up with it.
- The fact that they are married should make no difference. - no extraposed counterpart, because "It should make no difference the fact that they are married" is inadmissable - I just can't explain the grammatical reason why it is inadmissable
- I appreciate that you returned it sincerely. - I appreciate it sincerely that you returned it.
- It feels good to be back in my home town - For me, this sentence is already extraposed, so I don't know what to do here...
b) Give an existential counterpart of the following clause if available. If none is available, explain briefly why: His wife was very rich.
Here, there's no counterpart available, I just cannot explain why....
c) Give a non-existential counterpart of the following clause if available. If none is available, explain briefly why: There's nothing to worry about - no counterpart because "Nothing is to worry about" is inadmissable...again I cannot state the grammatical reason.
As you see I've problems explaining the rules. Can anyone help me please?