Hi Both if-clause constructions in sentence #1 and #2 are possible I think. The first sentence is a regular if-clause. The second one starts with a modal verb, which comes from the full construction 'If there should be any...'. That's

Hi, I've found a difficult sentence in a text I must translate. Apparently, is is not a typo, but I cannot quite understand what it means. The text has just described how oxen could be used to measure the price of articles, and

These are correct: 1. It is to be used as a replacement for the old equipment currently in use. 2. With your generous support, (the) construction has begun on our long-awaited project. It is expected to be completed soon. 3. Hearing the jingling

Consider: This album features a collection of songs that covers the band's earliest years together. It is the COLLECTION that covers, not the songs that cover. The X of Ys construction is often miswritten, and probably more often

1. first option 2. she is more than pretty enough... 3. you do 4. You will get not only enough money from the deal but also praise... (parallel construction)

not only / but also construction requires parallel structure. I would say: She not only dropped the wine but also broke the glass.

I find the repetition of about inadvisable Thanks again. I understand what you are saying. However, in an example of your sentence, placing 'not only' after 'a matter of' may lead to the construction of 'a matter of A and

Dear friend, the first set of examples is quite correct grammatically, no doubt, representing the pattern verb + object + to-infinitive complementation . In this case, passivization is possible, though some constraints still apply even to this

Raja, let me make a number of essential clarifications: 1. ' Hence , that the 'do'-construction in "Who went to the park?" is not possible or at least less preferable (which of the two is it in your opinion?) in "Who

Hello, Pleasehelp, ' where it's at ' is a set expression that became widespread in the sixties of the 20th century. In an example like I don't know where it's at it means that the speaker does not understand the essential truth