Search results for 'tag:Dates tag:Predicates' matching tags 'Dates' and 'Predicates'

need some help with some english exercises.

market-huxley — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 16:13:04 GMT

I'm taking a correspondence course. These are some of the exercises that I need to submit. So please I need help from grammar exerperts thnaks.

Exercise 1: Identify each of the â __ â words in the sentences as one of the following parts of the sentence:

1.Direct object

2.Indirect object

3.Predicate noun

4.Predicate adjective

A. I sent âherâ an âemailâ yesterday to comfirm the date of the meeting.

email=direct object. her=indirect object.

B. Elton John is a pop âicon.â

icon=predicate noun. But I'm unsure? Need help.

C. She seemed âhonestâ , but I was deceived

honest=predicate adjective.. the word itself is a adjective..ex:the honest doctor.

D. Give âmeâ a break!

me=indirect object. Ex: give what? A break, to whom ... to âmeâ

is this one right?

Exercise 2: copy each sentence; identify the simple subject and the simple predicate.

a. It is a shame! it=subject is=verb

b.Will you go to a movie with me? you=subject go=verb

c. Janet has been singing in the choir for years. Janet=subject .. the predicate I'm having trouble with... Is it "has been singing" or "singing" becuase "has been" are helping verbs. What is the "simple" predicate?

d. Through the dense bushes and into the open fields ran the white-tailed deer.

deer= subject. ran=verb

e. To win the gold medal is the goal of many athletes.

To win=subject is=verb (is this one correct?)

How are my answers looking?

Re: Is this an appositive or adverbial phrase?

Avangi — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 15:06:49 GMT

Hi O,

I'd vote for adverbial. For one thing, the phrase does not equal Nora, which condition I believe is necessary for an appositive.

If you rearrange the sentence (if this is allowed) you have, Nora is the best of all the candidates who are running, and (I think) the phrase may be said to modify best, which is a predicate adjective (I guess you call it complement), so it takes an adverb to modify an adjective.

Regards, - A.

Re: forms of "be"

Mister Micawber — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 05:51:11 GMT

The uses of be are numerous, Sunilghai:

âverb (used without object)

1.	to exist or live: Shakespeare's âTo be or not to beâ is the ultimate question.

2.	to take place; happen; occur: The wedding was last week.

3.	to occupy a place or position: The book is on the table.

4.	to continue or remain as before: Let things be.

5.	to belong; attend; befall: May good fortune be with you.

6.	(used as a copula to connect the subject with its predicate adjective, or predicate nominative, in order to describe, identify, or amplify the subject): Martha is tall. John is president. This is she.

7.	(used as a copula to introduce or form interrogative or imperative sentences): Is that right? Be quiet! Don't be facetious.

âauxiliary verb

8.	(used with the present participle of another verb to form the progressive tense): I am waiting.

9.	(used with the present participle or infinitive of the principal verb to indicate future action): She is visiting there next week. He is to see me today.

10.

(used with the past participle of another verb to form the passive voice): The date was fixed. It must be done.

11.

(used in archaic or literary constructions with some intransitive verbs to form the perfect tense): He is come. Agamemnon to the wars is gone.

Re: Lesson on issue of descriptive adjective and choice

Mister Micawber — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:23:37 GMT

Actually, I think I have already said what I had to say in my response to your post about the cats and alligators. But I'll go over some of your concerns:

I think I saw from a post here that kind of said that many times, having "descriptive adjectives" in front of UNCOUNTABLE NOUNS trigger the need (necesssity??) to have the indefinite article "a" -- I don't think there is the need, but certainly there is the possibility:

I have great faith in you.
I have a great sadness in my heart for their plight.

and I think Mr. M said to the effect that in many cases, the choice to put "a" or not to put it is optional for the cases like one below ("a great happiness" vs. just "great happiness")-- generally optional because both are possible; each case demands its own decision on which should be used.

Here, I think happiness is one-hundred percent uncountable noun??, not a variable noun.-- No, we have no context, and the noun itself is capable of either form.

His dog is a great happiness in his life. (Sounds good, isn't it? I think the writer is talking about a kind of happiness and not the general term, happiness.) -- I agree

His dog is great happiness in his life. (Sounds good, I think, and the writer seems to be saying that his dog is great happiness in a general sense, not to mean any kind of happiness.) -- I don't agree. You have set up a predicate nominative. His dog has brought great happiness into his life would be fine. I leave further analysis to you.

1) So, can I say in almost all the cases, the choice to put a or not to put a when you have some descriptive adjectives in front of them depend on the context and perspective of the writer? -- Yes, that sounds good-- but more critical is the semantic meaning.

2) Can you give me some cases where the choices as described above in not available? -- Not offhand, but I am sure there are many-- I am sure that not all candidate nouns are capable of such permutations.

3) Can you check if these are right?

This form of words is fantastic English. -- OK

This form of words is perfectly acceptable English. -- OK

This form of words is "good" English -- OK

This form of words is a fantastic English.-- Not so.

This form of words is a perfectly acceptable English. -- Not so.

This form of words is a "good" English. -- Not so

This form of words is a regional English -- OK. English and Englishes are specific concepts in linguistics; perhaps that is why the countable form is not so attractive in your sentences. Context, flexibility, semantics.
4) Right now, I have this uneasy feeling when I try to put what look to be descriptive adjectives in front of uncountable nouns because I am afraid I might accidently turn them into paticular kinds of something and not to mean generally. Do you think my feeling regarding that is unwarranted because the control is in me whether I want to make them to mean kinds of something or refer (or use them to mean something) in general terms? -- Fear not; just think what you are trying to say: are you speaking of a general concept or an individual instance? and choose accordingly.

5) Can I be able to put "a" in front of uncountable nouns which have what I think are descriptive adjectives? -- Generally yes, if you realize that it then becomes countable.

Is something in apostrophes qualify like "good" above qualify as a descriptive adjective? -- Yes.

Help. -- I hope this did.

A slight problem in Linking Verbs.

Grammarian-bot — Fri, 25 Aug 2006 02:51:36 GMT

As we know that linking verbs never express an action instead provide additional information about the subject. So by the virtue of this definition, the following example is good;

1. As he became old, he grew slow at remembering dates.

Here "grew" is the linking verb and "slow" is the predicate adjective. Now consider the following example;

2. The tree grew slowly.

Here the "grew" is a non-linking verb while "slowly" is an adverb. Within the exing context of this sentence (where no previous information is given about the tree), we cannot us a predicate adjective (or can we?). But if we modify this sentence by providing some addition information, so can we use an adjective, rather than an adverb, in this sentence as shown in the examples below;

3. After the 50th anniversary of the tree, which was planted by the President of the United States in 1945, it grew slow.
4. After the 50th anniversary of the tree, which was planted by the President of the United States in 1945, it grew slow in height.

Are both of the above examples acceptable or not?
Can we still use slowly in the above sentences?

GB

Save me from Boring English Grammar book, please!

Anonymous — Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:26:41 GMT

Recently, I picked up a few English grammar books in a bookstore with the intention of improving my grammar. However, I found that those books were the usual boring way of learning a language. They started with nouns, describing what a noun is and the various form of nouns and e.t.c. I personally find that this kind of teaching method is extremely boring. Why do they tell me what is a predicate and a subject ? Why do they ask me to underline a clause, a phrase, a compound noun, a complex statement in a sentence? Why do they describe to me passive voice, active voice and asking me to identify which group the sentences belong to in their boring exercises?

I want them to tell me why I need to know those. What are the benefits of knowing those and how do I improve my grammar by knowing those. I don't want them to sound so academic as if they themselves don't know why they need to tell me those facts and that they just pass to me what they have learnt from their own boring educational systems. It sounds so academic like teaching history to those average sleepy students......'Class, on 23rd of October, 1917, the American troops in France fire their first shot in trench warfare'. Then in their examination paper, there is a multiple question asking when the first shot was fired by the American troops in France. The students memorise the exact date, answer the question and get 2 marks. So what !? So What if American fired their first shot on 23rd October? Even if they wanted to shoot on 29th December, why do I need to care?!

Surely there must be an interesting way of learning English grammar. Hence I would appreciate if anyone of you in this forum who ever read a good interesting English grammar book, would be kind enough to share with us here.

Thanks.

Re: payment due on 9th November 2005 vs payment due 9th November 2005

pieanne — Thu, 10 Nov 2005 16:09:15 GMT

Nona, please excuse my butting in... "On" is a preposition. Whenever you state a date, you need that preposition before the date, "on 9th November". You can of course say "the due date for the payment was 9th November", "9th November" is a predicate, so you don't need the "on"

Re: Participle

Mister Micawber — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:15:40 GMT

I'm not sure whether ALL possible participles could function as adjectives; some I suppose are highly unlikely candidates. Could you list them, and we'll check?

I presume that you mean 'as a part of a verb phrase or as a predicate adjective'. The first thing I check (after the meaning, which is I think what native speakers do first) is whether the verb is a copulative; if it is 'become/seem/appear'/etc. then the following participle must (?) be functioning as an adjective; but if it is 'be', then I have to consider whether the participle is part of a passive-voice verb phrase.

Then we are back to the same problem: 'I am tired', 'he is bothered', etc., which we have previously discussed, Hanuman.

Re: It is I who....It is You who...

CalifJim — Tue, 03 Aug 2004 04:57:37 GMT

I got to thinking I could answer my own questions by browsing the Internet.
With the help of Google, I concluded that there really isn't an answer that everyone agrees on when it comes to this construction.

From: http://www.yaelf.com/aueFAQ/mifitsmevsiti.shtml

The final factor is the traditional use of Latin grammatical concepts to teach English grammar. This historical quirk dates to the 17th century, and has never quite left us. From this we get the Latin-derived rule, which Fowler still acknowledges. And we *do* follow that rule to some extent:

"Who are they?" (not "Who are them?" or "Whom are they?")
"We are they!" (in response to the preceding)
"It is I who am at fault."
"That's the man who he is."

But not always. "It is me" is attested since the 16th Century. (Speakers who would substitute "me" for "I" in the "It is I who am at fault" example would also sacrifice the agreement of person, and substitute "is" for "am" [resulting in "It is me who is at fault"].

-----

From: http://grammar.uoregon.edu/case/nomcase.html

It is I who have allergies.
- IT is the subject of the independent clause. I is the predicate nominative to IT. WHO is the subject of the final dependent clause.

------
From these excerpts I conclude that "It is I who am ..." is the more conservative form, "...I who is ..." being more modern.
Actual usage - from my Internet sample - whether right or wrong, varies between "It is I who have/am" and "It is I who has/is".

I wasn't interested enough in doing a count! I leave that to the reader! It seemed about 50-50, actually.