Search results for 'tag:Conversations tag:Prepositions' matching tags 'Conversations' and 'Prepositions'

Re: which vs of which

CalifJim — Wed, 21 May 2008 01:47:44 GMT

which, of which, among which, to which, about which, for which, ...

Combine The car is big with the following:

The car is blue. > The car which is blue is big. [no preposition before the car]

The car is parked there. > The car which is parked there is big. [no preposition before the car]

I bought the car. > The car which I bought is big. [no preposition before the car]

Helen likes the car. > The car which Helen likes is big. [no preposition before the car]

The workmen repaired the car in two hours. > The car which the workmen repaired in two hours is big. [no preposition before the car]

The strongman picked up the car. > The car which the strongman picked up is big. [no preposition before the car -- pick up is a phrasal verb]

The Smiths auctioned off the car. > The car which the Smiths auctioned off is big. [no preposition before the car -- auction off is a phrasal verb]

Jerry is talking about the car. > The car about which Jerry is talking is big.

I paid $10,000 for the car. > The for which I paid $10,000 is big.

The new puppy is afaid of the car. > The car of which the new puppy is afraid is big.

Robert traveled to Chicago in the car. > The car in which Robert traveled to Chicago is big.

A breeze is blowing through the car. > The car through which a breeze is blowing is big.

I hit a tree with the car. > The car with which I hit a tree is big.

A truck is headed toward the car. > The car toward which a truck is headed is big.

The children danced around the car. > The car around which the children danced is big.

Karen knows the owner of the car. > The car of which Karen knows the owner is big.

Albert lost the key to the car. > The car to which Albert lost the key is big.

Marty had trouble with the car. > The car with which Marty had trouble is big.

Lucy set a book on the car. > The car on which Lucy set a book is big.

There's not enough gas in the car. > The car in which there's not enough gas is big.

A stranger walked up to the car. > The car up to which a stranger walked is big. [up to - a compound preposition]

The stranger ran away from the car. > The car from which the stranger ran away is big. [run away - a phrasal verb]

______

Note that these sentences are for pattern practice only. They are not particularly useful in conversations or in written essays!

Re: conversation - date

Doll — Tue, 06 May 2008 11:33:44 GMT

Hello Mr. Micawber,

I didn't understand (iii). For three days only, beginning 11 May. I have always thought a preposition is needed.

Re: Hi Hoa Thai,

Hoa Thai — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 11:41:45 GMT

NL888 wrote:
Thanks for replying.

But would you like to tell me the secret why you could get it so well since you are in Vietnam ? Is English your native language? The name Hoa Thai is absolutely Vietnamese! Are you an English teacher/professor in college there?

Hi,

Thanks for the kind words.

Vietnamese I am!

English is one of the foreign languages that I have learned for many years, and I still have a long way to learn. I am teaching Vietnamese to foreigners in Vietnam. To communicate well with them, I must achieve a level of proficiency that is comparable to a semi-native English speaker's. That takes time and determination. I do love teaching and sharing. That helps me explore many ways to deliver my messages. And that in turn helps me find different angles to learn another language. There are many proven methods to learn a second language well. However, in the end, we must find our own way after we get to an intermediate level (to me that is when we can use the language comfortably in daily conversation). What has been working for me is reading anything I can get in my hands. I also spend time listening to / watching various news and entertainment programs that are broadcasted in English. Finally, I write everything that I learn using my own words and often go back and rewrite them until I am satisfied. Then I rewrite it again using new words that I learn - removing rough edges by polishing and keeping polishing.

One thing that I would recommend to you is when you write a sentence, try to use a dictionary to verify the meaning of the new words that you use. Form a short sentence and search for its use on the Internet, especially when you deal with prepositions. The difficulty for all of us is to separate the good English from the poor ones. If you cannot resolve the problem yourself, bring it to the forum. One more thing, don't try to learn so many things at the same time. Find one item that you feel uncomfortable with and attack it from many angles until you feel free from the bewilderment. Once you get there, write a note to yourself, explaining things (again) in your own words. That's my way. I hope it helps.

Re: Comes in colours.

Alan.es — Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:34:49 GMT

Yes, I'll and we'll are contractions of I shall and we shall.

Yes, teaching whom does irritate me a little but it's not tested as much so minor irritation only.

I accept and use shall in my own conversations and writing but then I learned my grammar when you couldn't end a sentence with a preposition nor could you split an infinitive.

Google is very useful but I don't accept its use as a means of proof for correct usage in English.

Let's not argue about the disappearance of shall from the English language. It will be with us for many years yet but its use in everyday English has declined enormously already.

The same is true for whom.

prepositions again..

JCDenton — Wed, 12 Dec 2007 13:38:17 GMT

Hey folks,

In the email conversation with our supplier of the ActiveX component from US, I need to express to the supplier the fact that we really need to have fixed one hot problem, which concerns one particular capability, which our customers really like . And it's impossible to release our software, without this having fixed....Please what is grammatically correct?

This capability is popular by our customers...or this capability is popular at our customers.

thanks and I apologize for that kind of question, but prepositions are maybe the only part of english, which I'll never get under my skin...

with regards

JCD.

Re: evening (without preposition) / to start to doing

CalifJim — Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:15:29 GMT

evening is the subject of the sentence. You certainly don't want a preposition before it!

You could optionally add the, however. The evening of a hot day ...

*to start to doing something is unusual, as you say. That's because it's wrong -- for the intransitive use of start. But note that Steinbeck is using the transitive form of start. to start something (the wind) to doing something. Even so, it is still unusual. started the little wind to moving is a somewhat poetic way of saying caused the little wind to start moving.

The structure is only occasionally used in ordinary conversation.

Hearing about how they redid their kitchen started my wife to thinking whether we could do that ourselves. (caused my wife to start thinking)

CJ

Re: What is the difference between "Talk"(VERB) and "Speak"(VERB)

Hoa Thai — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 12:53:06 GMT

Hi,

When I first learned English, hear and listen were clear to me. The later requires the attentiveness of a listener. However, talk and speak ran my teacher in circle. He took an English-Vietnamese dictionary and told us to stick with the translation and then he failed to reason why some English sentences we presented to him begged for different interpretation! Today seeing this question again, I dearly miss him for the pain he went through trying to give us a bit of his knowledge. Therefore, I thought maybe this is a good opportunity for me to go through what he went through.

Please allow me to deduct slowly.

1. Talk and speak are both voice related, so sound making cannot be contributed solely to either one.

2. We can attach preposition of or about to both talk and speak. Therefore, neither word owns the right to content.

3. When we speak or talk, we could be interrupted for questioning. Of course, we can also attach preposition to or with to both of them Therefore, neither word owns the right to interaction either.

4. When a baby utters the first sound that is similar to a word we know, we excitedly say, âs/he speaks.â When the baby can string a few words together, in responding to the surrounding stimulating environment, either to a toy or to people, we claim, âs/he talks.â Talk seems to win the conversational aspect (two-way communication goes with talk albeit the listener might not say a word â uni-directional delivery goes with speak).

5. We speak a language; we donât talk a language unless we mean knowing how to speak in (e.g., talk French â idiom). Again, in this case, speak is confined to the speaker (i.e., one-way).

6 When we phone people (i.e., we initiate the connection):
- Most often we donât know whether the person we phone is available or not, we say, âIs â¦ there?â, or politely âMay / Could I speak to â¦â (again, one-way).-
- However, if we yearn for a conversation / an exchange, we ask, âMay I talk to â¦â (two-way).

7. When we suggest people to listen to a speech, we might say,â listen to his talkâ but virtually none âlisten to his speak.â Talk seems to require more attention than speak. It requires the listeners to connect, to feel, to understand.. (one-way delivery, two-way sharing).

8. âSpeaker of the houseâ not âTalker of the houseâ- (uni-voice).

Inference:

talk: bi-directional communication.
speak: uni-directional communication.

Cheers,
Hoa Thai

Re: What is the difference between "Talk"(VERB) and "Speak"(VERB)

Edison1610 — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:52:34 GMT

They talked for a while.
(they were in conversation)
They speaked for a while.
(they made sound)

He is talking about the issue.
He is speaking of the issue.
(both are the same but the prepositions are different)

They talk business.
(they discuss business)
They speak business
(wrong)

Money talks.
(idiom)
Money speaks.
(we don't use it in this way)

He cannot speak.
(he is unable to speak)
He cannot talk.
(he can speak but cannot talk, e.g. he has no power in front of boss)

He speaks to her.
He talks to her.
(both are the same)

Re: with or without 'at'

Cool Breeze — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 14:53:33 GMT

Grammar Geek wrote:
I go home, and I stay home, and I am home.
Certainly, with motion involved, there's no preposition: I went home, I ran home, I returned home...

Hi GG

That's certainly always true. However, especially in literary style and in upper-class British English there is a tendency to use at in all other cases. If Prime Minister James Hacker in a superb television series entitled Yes, Prime Minister were to tell somebody his whereabouts, I think he would say: I am at home.

In casual conversation people say: I'm home even in Britain.

Cheers
CB

Re: Which way would you sway?

MrPedantic — Fri, 25 May 2007 00:08:15 GMT

Milky wrote:

<I would be interested to see quotations from the early English grammarians that presented spoken English as somehow inferior, or that demonstrated an imposition of inappropriate rules from Latin. >

Do you doubt that was the case?

"Doubt" is too strong a word. I would be interested to see the quotations.

If so, I guess you disagree with this:

"If they have studied "English Grammar", this is probably an encumbrance which they might well put aside for the present, since it is based on a more or less imitative recapitulation of Classical Latin Grammar, which is totally non-applicable to the English language as it now stands.

I would disagree that Classical Latin Grammar is "totally non-applicable" to the English language (or vice versa). It would be truer to say that many aspects of Latin grammar are non-applicable to English.

I would also disagree with the notion that the study of English grammar for any given person is bound to have been based on Latin grammar; though no doubt the statement is true for some people.

[Lowth] condemned "forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language"¹).

Sounds sensible.

His most famous (or infamous) contribution to the study of grammar was his prescription that sentences ending with a prepositionâsuch as "what did you ask for?"âare inappropriate in formal writing.

Sounds doubtful. Though Lowth doesn't appear to mention Latin in his reasoning:

"This is an Idiom which our language is strongly inclined to; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the Preposition before the Relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous; and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated Style."

And he seems to limit his prescription to the "solemn and elevated Style", which is a relatively rare form of English.

Thus Lowth condemns Addison's sentence "Who should I meet the other night, but my old friend?" on the grounds that the thing acted upon should be in the "Objective Case" (corresponding, as he says earlier, to an oblique case in Latin), rather than taking this example and others as evidence from noted writers that "who" can refer to direct objects.

I would not agree with Lowth about Addison's sentence; but nothing here suggests that his justification lay in Latin grammar.

"Objective case" doesn't seem a particularly pernicious phrase; "whom" is undeniably an example; and what remains of the objective case in English "corresponds" in some of its functions to the accusative case in Latin.

I know that some popular sources repeat the notion that early English grammarians attempted to impose Latin grammar on English; but I've yet to see any primary evidence.

MrP