Search results for 'tag:Clauses tag:Grammar' matching tags 'Clauses' and 'Grammar'

Re: nominative absolute clause..

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:39:35 GMT

Yes, it is. This is otherwise referred to in grammar as ABSOLUTE CONSTRUCTION. By definition, it is a reduced adjective or adverb clause that functions as sentence modifier indicating time and causality. This type of construction is commonly used more in writing than in speaking. I hope I've been able to help you in this matter.

Re: to being

Mister Micawber — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:24:22 GMT

.
It seems bad grammar to me there; however, I can say 'When it comes to being impatient, Mister Micawber takes the cake'.

Being impatient is a non-finite clause acting as a noun. When it comes to cake, Mitsy bakes the best. When it comes to = in the case of.
.

Re: 1)How can we correct the sentence:

Mister Micawber — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:25:12 GMT

The answer was e. But I have never seen a "because" after comma-- A comma can appear after because if the clause is less restrictive.

2) The meaning of his words was even more elusive in his own country than either Europe or Latin America ( the underscore is a wrong phrase)

Can we replace the underscored phrase with "either in Europe or Latin Am" or " in either Europe or Latin Am"?-- I'd use the latter, but something is fishy about your underlining.

3) On my preparing for exam, I came up with this sentence:

Spot the error:

Kelly is proud of her own abilities to mediate disputes more than any of her other strength. No error

The answer was C ( as the book says) but here is its explanation:

"Does the subordinate clause fit within the context of the sentenc? ( A) uses the correct verb tense and the verb agrees w/ subject Kelly. (B) shows the correct feminine sing. pronoun, referring to Kelly (C) shows the correct infi. form of the verb mediate.

So what is the answer??-- There are a lot of errors in what you typed. D is wrong.

4) here is part of a math question I couldn't find out why:

Which is the graph of y= -(x-2)2 (2 outside the bracket means square)?

Graphs drawn below.

And here was the solution:

If f(x) = -x2 , the given equation, y= -(x-2)2, represents f(x-2)

How come they got the last line?-- I have no idea. This is a grammar forum.

Re: Which one is correct?

Clive — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 00:45:26 GMT

Hi,
Can you help me please ?

Which one is correct? And why?

--
Where is my wallet?
Where is the police station?
OR
Where my wallet is?
Where the police station is?

English grammar requires the inversion shown in #1 and #2.

However, note that you can say things like
I know where my wallet is.
Do you know where my wallet is?
In these examples, 'where my wallet is' is not a question, but simply a noun clause.

Best wishes, Clive

Best wishes, Clive

Re: TOEIC/ error recognition

Clive — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:31:53 GMT

Hi,
When the repair person (A) had completed her work (B) was fixing the PCs in our office, she (C) put away her tools and (D) wrote out a bill for the supervisor.

The answer key says (B) is incorrect but doesn't tell me what to change, so I think it could be corrected as follows:

1. fixing
2. to fix
3. which was fixing

Please advise on these possible corrections. All 3 of your suggestions are incorrect grammar. It's a hard test sentence for a student to understand, because A and B are actually alternatives. B is incorrect, and A is correct.

In addition, I was wondering why (A) is in past perfect tense but not the past tense word "completed"? I remember one native speaker in this forum once told me that the verb tense appeared in a "when" clause should usually go with simple tense.Past Perfect is fine, but Simple Past would also be fine. The sequence of events is clear.

Please also advise on this one.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: ellipted phrase here?

Clive — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:23:26 GMT

Hi,
Thank you. It does seem not so clearly written. I don't know what the phrase 'plugged in' refers to either. If I have to make a guess, I think it would be for 'desires'.

You revised my sentence like this:

This is a pen (that is was ) bought yesterday. <<< This is OK.

Anyway, how would we know what is ellipted if 'that is' and 'what was' can be ellipted (forgetting the word 'yesterday')? Why do you want to forget 'yesterday'? You wouldn't naturally just say 'This is a pen bought'.

The work (that is or that was??) finished by Jane wasn't as good as the work (that is or that was?) finished by Joe.

'Was' would normally be assumed in a past situatoon like the above. For a present situation, you'd say something like
The work (that is ) being finished by Jane isn't as good as the work (that is ) being finished by Joe.

If you wanted to make a general statement, this would be normally be clear from the context. eg
Jane and Joe make furniture. The work finished by Jane is not as good as the wotrk finished by Joe, so I never buy it.

I think I have learned (if I learned it correctly) that this kind of ellipsis can't be applied when the subordinate clause is modifying a subject.

I think this can be figured out easily by reference:

The work (that was) done by Joe yesterday wasn't submiited to the committee on time andthe work (that) finally got submitted was John's.

The part in red is incorrect grammar. Say something like
The work (that was) done by Joe yesterday wasn't submiited to the committee on time and the work (that was) finally submitted was John's.

Best wishes, Clive

Two lines of lyrics from Daniel Powter "free loop"

Kevin X — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 13:18:45 GMT

Hi guys,

I found it diffcult understanding what exactly the two lines mean (as a whole):

I've been fabulous through to fight my town a name.
I'll be stooped tomorrow if I don't leave as them both the same.

I read the first line as saying:

I've been feeling totally great fighting for a good name for my town.

As for the second, I can't even figure out how the "if" clause can be explained in grammar, if any.

Most translations I can find see the second as saying:

If I don't leave, I'll be just as stooped as they both are.

But I doubt that. What or whom is "them" referring to? Why use "both?" Of what?

Would someone please help me with it?

Thanks a lot!

He should come so that I can see him

Jesusengland — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 09:26:26 GMT

Hello.

"When the main clause refers to the present, you usually use 'can', 'may' or 'shall' in the purpose clause (so that)." (Collins Cobuild Grammar).

- He should come so that I can see him.

But in this sentence, does "should" refer to the present? Is it correct?

Thanks.

Re: Some grammar questions

dionusos — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:35:13 GMT

Doll

Hello,

Welcome to EF!

Thanks

My two cents:

dionusos

-- would vs will

Let's say you're discussing a plans for a party or a law that may or may not actualize but you're describing what they will entail.
Would you say "the party would" or "the law would incriminate people who blah blah blah"

instead of "the party will" or "the law will"?

I've noticed in some newspapers the use of "will" even about laws and ordinances that are being proposed or voted on.

It seems to me that "will" is preferred most of the time however using would or will depends on your intention and meaning you want to give us. Would suggest a hypothetical thing.

This is confusing. Because ,say, a bill is written. All that needs to happen for it to become a law is for it to be passed. So a proposed law isn't a hypothetical. But "will" tends is used to indicate likelihood or certainty. Is it then appropriate to say, "The law will" or must you qualify the noun wiht "proposed" every time you refer to it?

--,which is.., or not?

I notice "which is" is occasionally omitted in writing.

For example, "She was referred to Teen Court, [which is] an early intervention program of the Visalia Council on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse."

When is it ok to omit the "which is" ? Is there a rule here?

Writing "which" makes the sentence long and if you see it in a newspaper and if it is omitted, I can say that they want to save time and space. But for academic writing and similar things to be opne and not to cause ambiguity you should use "which". In everday life, it is omitted most of the time.

Ok. So then it's a matter of convenience. I thought there was some rule I was missing.

-- When do you say "said that" or merely "said" when using attribution at the beginning of a sentence?

Ah, this calls for a lesson! You should search clauses or simply write "said that " and you will find lots of information.

I tried that. It would really require a lesson?

-- Why is "had" needed in the following sentence from an Times article?

"Federal authorities said Tuesday that they "had" cracked

the largest case of identity theft in U.S. history,..."
I wish you had written the whole sentence here so that we could explain it to you more correctly. I think they used "had" ,as far as I see from the non-complete sentence, because they want to state that cracking happened before an event occured in past.

Here you go: ""Federal authorities said Tuesday that they "had" cracked the largest case of identity theft in U.S. history, charging 11 people in the theft of more than 40 million credit and debit card account numbers from computer systems at such major retailers as TJ *** and Barnes & Noble."

And is the "has" needed in the following sentence from another times article:

"DSW also "has" sent notification letters to affected

customers whenever possible..."
Write the complete sentence please and I don't see anything wrong with the half sentence.

Nevermind on this one. I figured it out. Sheesh. I don't know how I missed it. The "has" was referring to "whenever possible."

Re: tank top

New2grammar — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:42:04 GMT

Thanks, RayH! I get it now. I thought a tube top revealed the tummy, thus the shape of a tube. http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/PMO2058.jpg

Grammar Geek
you politely ignore it as though nothing had happened

I got it now. The reason you used "had happened" was that "as though" makes the following clause hyphothetical. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks, GG.