Had and been are both helping verbs. Helping verbs must help action verbs. In this sentence, had and been are helping the present participle making , which is an action verb. Because making is a present participle, it must have helping verbs to

need can be used both as an ordinary verb and a modal verb. "Need" means something like "must have". "Need to" is something like "must". It's not quite the same, but it has a very similar meaning.

I often find that, when I'm asked if something is "acceptable" in English, my first response is "No, it isn't" and then I find myself uncovering instances where it might be in a given context. Using a stative verb in

There is a class of verbs in English known as "stative" verbs because they relate to a state of being rather than an action (as in a dynamic verb); believe, hate, love for example are stative verbs. These are never used in the continuous

Hi Anon, BrE = British English.

Thank you very much. However I don't understand the meaning of "BrE". If you don't mind, could you tell me?

Yes, the change seems all right to me; it will then sound slightly more BrE, I think.

No. "Should have" is correct. "Should of" is incorrect. There is no proper use of "should of ." "Of" does not functin as a helping verb. It's simply a result of people speaking

Tell your teacher that the verb 'have' when it means 'possess' (and other stative verbs like 'resemble', 'suit') are not put into passive voice. He must choose an active, transitive verb.

Hi. Thank you so much. If I am not mistaken the two sentences that you corrected are representative of first conditional sentences. Could we have use the modal verb "should" in first conditional sentences like this (borrowing the