In certain short clauses, commas are probably not necessary (as in Dimsum's last sentence), but certainly where it appears e.g. in a subject noun phrase, it is appositive (not 'parenthetical'), as the verb number is governed by the subject itself:

Greetings, Tina, Mister Micawber's answers are completely relevant, but let me make some additional remarks: 1. A time of prosperity and peace - is a noun phrase you analysed absolutely correctly. In general, noun phrases may have the

'for some jerk to...' doesn't look like a noun phrase. No, but from for to the end of the sentence is, in fact, a noun phrase. It's a for ... to ... clause, and all such clauses are noun-like. It's important for him to be here

Hi, For her to have survived this ordeal is amazing." In this sentence , is " For her to have survived " used as a noun phrase ? Yes What is the meaning of the sentence ? Does it mean that the event of her

Here is my take: Recognizing the immediate danger, he ordered everyone to evacuate the building. - participle phrase usge. Recognize is a transitive verb, but I've used it without an object and as a gerund. Is that acceptable? Or,

It is the object of the verb. Verb objects are nouns, noun phrases or noun clauses. Ergo, it is a gerund (an '-ing' verb form acting as a noun.) (This conversation started HERE .)

1. The question has been answered a few times already , but has not been answered. Okay to omit the subject in the sentences like the above (omitting the subject in the second clause), right? A comma before but is necessary even when the

Peg: Noun: Economics . The level at which some price, exchange rate, etc., is set. Actually, how can we know whether it works as a noun or a verb ? Because it has an article for a start. The territory’s currency peg " Territory's

Jaleel.nt, in the first instance, we deal with a phenomenon that is conventionally known as a passive gerund ; the whole clause with being... can be substituted with a noun phrase, eg, ...this award . Therefore, we refer to being... as a nominal

Dear speakers of English. I have a question concerning English relative clause which had long been my headache. Here is my sentence: He is the son of Mike, who is my best friend. My question is: which one should be the antecedent of the