Search results for 'tag:Clauses' matching tag 'Clauses'

Re: correction 2

New2grammar — Sat, 17 May 2008 06:31:39 GMT

Regarding your second *, I included the clause because I was confident that I wouldn't be late that time for the first time.

Would it be clearer, if I had changed to "There's no way she's going to be waiting for me THIS TIME"?

Also, I wonder how you feel about " ~~came to 5 miles away from~~ "?

Thanks CJ for making the correction. It looks like there's a long way to go before I can write comfortably with few mistakes.

Re: correction 2

CalifJim — Sat, 17 May 2008 06:11:51 GMT

Today, I went to the airport to pick up my girlfriend. This time, I left home 20 minutes earlier than I usually ~~did~~ do, which ~~was~~ is around 40 minutes.*
So, I thought to myself, "There's no way she's going to be waiting for me. I'll be there waiting even before the flight attendants announce the landing." Feeling confident and enjoying every moment, [the thought crossed my mind]*, I ~~came to 5 miles away from~~ was already within five miles of the airport when I received a phone call. ~~The~~ My first thought was that it was the customer service guy who'd failed numerous times ~~trying~~ to fix my laptop, trying to beg for more repair time. [Picking up the phone]*, ~~a female's voice with an excited tone said~~ I heard an excited female voice say, "Hi ~~Honey~~ honey, where are you now? I can't wait another minute to see you."

Are there any mistakes ! ?

Thanks in advance!

*unclear whether total time was 40 or 60 minutes.

*unclear why this clause is included, or even why the clause preceding it is included, for that matter.

*A voice did not pick up the phone! This is a typical example of the mistake called "dangling participle". That's why I changed the following clause.

Re: the expression of action or that of occurrence?

Anonymous — Sat, 17 May 2008 05:47:05 GMT

ï¼ï¼What I mean is ---

P: He enjoyed listening to the music.

In P, the whole sentence (He enjoyed listening to the music.) clearly expresses a past occurrence / fact.

It's because the sentence has the Subject and Tense.

But "listening to the music" expresses a past action, I think, because it has no Subject, or Tense (no infornmation for time and place).

So I think whether "to do" / "---ing" / "that clause" is an action or occurrence doesn't depend on their time (past / present / future).

What I want to know most is whether we should regard as action or occurrence what we express both by using "---ing" and by that clauseï¼ï¼such as X and Y.

X: I remember seeing her in that shop the other day.

Y: I remember that I saw her in that shop the other day.

Re: Applicability...

New2grammar — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:29:58 GMT

I'm afraid the clause is not understandable. What are you trying to say?

asking for your future employer to review your job application?

Re: "I would be surprised..."

CalifJim — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:49:44 GMT

I was concentrating on the choice between were and was (subjunctive vs. indicative), and I neglected to address the choice between was/were and is (past vs. present).

New2grammar
Could you please 'defend' native speakers' tendency?

You're referring to the use of past throughout once the main clause introduces the past tense. Hmmm. Defend it? That's difficult. If you're right there looking at the boxes, I suppose is is just as good as was or were. The situation is in present time, after all. I suppose that when the native speaker matches the tenses throughout a sentence, it's a matter of habit, not always a matter of logic. The basic principle is that backshifting is always correct. Not backshifting is optional, and depends on the logic of the situation.

I'm not sure if that answers your question, because I'm not sure there's ever actually a 'defense' for how people use language.

Re: Grammar questions

Marius Hancu — Thu, 15 May 2008 12:50:31 GMT

In the future, please use italics for the example sentences, in order to separate them from your own comments/questions, say:

1. (My husband Mark and I both do volunteer work) but (Ryan was only six years old)

two independant clauses conected by the conj. but?

---

Use the "I" (italics) button in your editor. Same about bolding (B)

Re: comma usage

Mister Micawber — Thu, 15 May 2008 11:34:13 GMT

.
First: No comma before to establish. the context of the nonfinite clause is restrictive of failure, not parenthetical.
Second: definitely NO comma before sparked. You cannot place a single comma between Subject and Verb.

Re: so do they

Liveinjapan — Thu, 15 May 2008 06:13:08 GMT

Thanks, Avangi.

I missed 'Just as'.

Please give me a comment on this:

"The reason I'm here tonight is because the Democratic voters have made their choice, and so have I,"

I think both clauses before and after and are independent ones so and is normally used, right?

Re: so do they

Avangi — Thu, 15 May 2008 05:49:40 GMT

Actually, no. I'd say the portion after your "and" is the main clause, and the humongus one leading up to it is only subordinate.

As Maine goes, so goes the country. This is an old political addage about GG's state, meaning that whoever Maine votes for will win the election. I know it's strange. Neither clause really seems independent. They depend on each other. (Perhaps it's another example of one CJ just posted as "interlocking clauses.")

- A.

Re: Participial Construction??

Mister Micawber — Thu, 15 May 2008 04:48:42 GMT

.
Your examples are of participial construction and rightly bear the same subject as the main clause. However, participial constructions also exist outside that relationship.

With the wind blowing abeam, we quickly tacked to the inlet.-- Here, the participal clause is the object of a preposition.