Search results for 'tag:Articles tag:Conditionals' matching tags 'Articles' and 'Conditionals'

Re: I'm sorry If I...

Clive — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:55:06 GMT

Hi,
A couple more small comments.

You need an article.

How would I say to apologize to sb for sth?
"I am sorry If I gave you the/a wrong impression"
or
"I am sorry If I have given you the/a wrong impression"?

The above is commonly said, but to my mind it is less than a full apology, because it is conditional.

It's like saying 'If I made a mistake, I'm sorry.'
instead of 'I made a mistake. I'm sorry'.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: "could" and "would"

Mister Micawber — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:36:23 GMT

.

1.
I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could take your place in helping me while I am in chains for the gospel.
Would you say that the "could" is the past of "can" here? -- The conditional, if it is meant to be Conditional III, seems incorrect as it stands. I suggest: 'I would have liked to keep him with me so that he could have taken your place...'. This is not a past tense of 'can' it is a condition that cannot now be met.

2.
So, if you consider me a partner, welcome him as you would welcome me.

Would you say the "would" is a case of an ellipted "if-clause"?-- Yes. If yes, what "if-clause" that would be?-- 'if I were to visit you'.

3. I think it might be still considered grammatically correct to write it as "consider me partner" with the article in front of the word "partner" in the above. Don't you agree?-- I don't agree. It is odd.
.

WOULD

shehan1212 — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:37:12 GMT

In formal writing pepole use past simple tense.But i have seen many times books and other articles includes sentenceswhich have been made of "would"...I know that "would" is used in conditional clauses.Where as i realy want to know what are the situations where i can use "wolud" and please explain me whats the difference between "would" and "will".Can i use these two terms as the same meaning in formal writting?

what i want to know is this.please help me to find out this,iv beendying to get a answer which i expect,,
here,this is a sentence which i found in my text book.

"Under this method materials in concern WOULD BE stored in two different places in th company's storeroom"

so my question is this is a general fact.this is tru.so cant i use present simple tense?
"Under this method material in concern ARE STORED.."

all possible uses of WOULD

ravikumarkargam — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 02:34:22 GMT

Hi,
Could you please share common uses of word : WOULD besides the below forms that I already knew.Â

Polite request: Would you close the window, please?
Conditional II and III: If I saw you, I would greet you. If I had seen you, I would have greeted you.
Past habit: When I was young, I would play outside all day.

Can I use it in the context of possibility (not quite sure) situations?

Also please let me know what WOULD is conveying in following 2 sentences which I encountered in today's news article.

It is not known whether the Fed WOULD now change course and agree to provide an emergency infusion of capital to the cash-starved insurance giant, or what form such aid WOULD take.

If the Fed intervenes, it WOULD be an eleventh-hour bailout of A.I.G.
(why not WILL is more appropriate here?)

Also I will appreciate if you could provide link to comprehensive use WOULD.

Thanks,
Ravi

Re: Lack of emphasis on NPs in ESL

Anonymous — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 22:39:51 GMT

>>It is not difficult at all for me to use conditional structures (= modal verbs) in polite requests, like in "Could you lend me 1,000 dollars?", because very similar structures are used the same way in Italian too. <<

And do they omit articles in Italian?

"Could you lend me a 1,000 dollars?",

Re: Conditional:Auxiliary Commentary Words?

Mister Micawber — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:26:02 GMT

You wrote this as your partical response to the overall question:
I think that the "good morning's" are inappropriate.-- No
I think his "how are you's" are inappropriate. -- No. His "how are you"s are inappropriate. I don't think we need the "?".

Your technique (if I can call it that) is new to me. Anyway, how do you make distinctions as to which phrase/clause is appropriate to put an "s" after putting quotation marks around it: why not "good morning" but "how are you"?

I don't understand your question. The '-s' goes outside the quotation marks, as I indicated in both italicized sentences.

And I wrote this:
Thank you. So if the word is specifically referenced to by context, we should use the definite article to indicate specifcity of it like you did with the noun 'power'. Is that right?

-- Yes again.

The problem I have is that it is hard to distinguish situations where the detinite noun is necessary

-- It takes some practice.

We value freedom of press.
Order for proclamation of the King's Peace

In the two examples above I feel can use the detinite noun and not use it with little difference, if at all.

-- As they stand, the first should have no article and the second should: freedom of the press is a general freedom, but the King is a specific king. That at least is the presumption that the reader should make.

I thin the same goes to the original sentences with the word 'power' except you are very sure the reference it to a specific group of people and situation needs to be specific, but I feel, in most wriiting situations in the real world, don't need the definiteness brought by having placed 'the' before the likes of the word 'power'.

-- I agree that there is often an option; nevertheless, in your sentence, a specific power source is implied-- i.e the power supplied at where 'they' are.
.

Re: Conditional:Auxiliary Commentary Words?

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 07:16:11 GMT

THANK YOU.

You wrote:

I think they are unaffected, but I think also that the 'would's are incorrect:

If the power goes out, I dare to think that they will all leave.
If the power goes out, I bet they will all leave.
If the power goes out, I am sure that they will all leave.
If the power goes out, I bet that they will all leave.

And I wrote this:
Thank you. So if the word is specifically referenced to by context, we should use the definite article to indicate specifcity of it like you did with the noun 'power'. Is that right?

And to that, I think you said 'yes'.

The problem I have is that it is hard to distinguish situations where the detinite noun is necessary (as it seems) since some words like 'freedom' and 'proclamation' and possibly 'power' have what I can say a capacity to dwell and function well in both specifically referenced and non-specifically referenced situations like this:

We value freedom of press.

This one I picked out from the google book search:

Order for proclamation o fthe King's Peace

Two examples above I feel can use the detinite noun and not use it with little difference, if at all.

I thin the same goes to the original sentences with the word 'power' except you are very sure the reference it to a specific group of people and situation needs to be specific, but I feel, in most wriiting situations in the real world, don't need the definiteness brought by having placed 'the' before the likes of the word 'power'.

So, in most cases, I feel the version without the 'the's is good.

If power goes out, I dare ...

Re: Conditional:Auxiliary Commentary Words?

Mister Micawber — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 03:44:18 GMT

.
Thank you. So if the word is specifically referenced to by context, we should use the definite article to indicate specifcity of it like you did with the noun 'power'. Is that right?-- Yes

You wrote this as an introducing part (if that is phrased right) to the examples:
I think they are unaffected, but I think also that the 'would's are incorrect:

I have hard time finding out how to pluralize words like"'would" or 'how are you?"You seemed to have attach an 's' after putting the word "would" in the quotation marks. Is it how it should be done? --Yes. I used single quote marks; double marks are more formally correct.

How about this? I think they are unaffected, but I think also that the "would's" are incorrect-- No

How about these?

I think that the '"do's and don'ts" are inappropriate to the situation.-- Yes. Do's and don'ts is an idiom. (Notice that for clarity we do not use a second apostrophe in "don't's")
I think that the "good morning's" are inappropriate.-- No
I think his "how are you's" are inappropriate. -- No. His "how are you"s are inappropriate. I don't think we need the "?".

Re: Conditional:Auxiliary Commentary Words?

Anonymous — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:21:32 GMT

Thank you. So if the word is specifically referenced to by context, we should use the definite article to indicate specifcity of it like you did with the noun 'power'. Is that right?

You wrote this as an introducing part (if that is phrased right) to the examples:
I think they are unaffected, but I think also that the 'would's are incorrect:

I have hard time finding out how to pluralize words like"'would" or 'how are you?"You seemed to have attach an 's' after putting the word "would" in the quotation marks. Is it how it should be done? How about this?

I think they are unaffected, but I think also that the "would's" are incorrect:

How about these?

I think that the '"do's and don'ts" are inappropriate to the situation.
I think that the "good morinng's" are inappropriate.
I think his "how are you's" are inappropriate. -- this seems to be a difficult one since I feel "how are you" should have a question mark at the end and it is difficult to know what to do with the mark.

sentence questions

Anonymous — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 22:19:49 GMT

Hi, I was looking at the article titled "U.S. chides Seoul for beef backslide" on its Saturday, May 17th, 2008 edition of the JoongAng Daily and have these questions on some sentences it had: Washington , on the other hand, is demanding that Korea fully open its markets t U.S. beef before it considers the trade deal. The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA is ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices. Rewriting those again: Washington , on the other hand, is demanding that Korea fully open its markets t U.S. beef before it considers the trade deal. -- I feel "before it starts to consider" is better. Wrong? The U.S. commerce secretary said that if the FTA is ratified, it would create jobs in Korea and the U.S.and give consumers in both countries more choices. -- Is this the right first conditional?? Also, if I put 'then' before the main clause, what, if any, difference would (will??) it make? Would your anaswer it apply to all conditioanl sentences? .. If the FTA is ratified, (then??) it would create jobs in Korea and ...