Search results for 'tag:Difference between tag:Contractions' matching tags 'Difference between' and 'Contractions'

Re: There is no/not

CalifJim — Sun, 25 May 2008 07:43:26 GMT

Penicillin
What's the ~~differnece~~ difference between "There is no..." and "There isn't any..."?

There is no difference. (There isn't any difference.) I've heard it said that there is a tendency to use the first pattern with abstract ideas and the second pattern with concrete objects. It's not completely clear to me whether this is true. I'm not aware of any study that has found a definite difference between the two.

Because you left out the word "any", I'm not sure this answers the question.

isn't is a contraction of is not. no and not are different words. Maybe your question had something to do with this instead. ???

Re: Plurals of abbreviations - 1990's or 1990s

Anonymous — Fri, 02 May 2008 22:33:21 GMT

I think the p's and q's argument is most salient here. The apostrophe is used for the sake of clarity. While conventionally used for the possessive, the apostrophe is also used to indicate vernacular omissions and contractions, such as in the cases of "Ol' Dirty ***" or "N'awlins." This understadning of the usage of apostrophes is important for thinking about the 1990s/1990's problem. If you were to spell out the actual words 1990 and 1990s/1990's, you get the words "nineteen ninety" and "nineteen nineties." The difference between these two words is a "y" and an "ies." The possessive spelling of 1990's would be "nineteen ninety's," the plural, "nineteen nineties." The abbreviated representation of the possessive should clearly be 1990's, but what about the plural? One could argue that the apostrophe in this case stands for the omission of the "ie" in "nineteen nineties"

Re: The difference between Let us and Let's.

Carson21 — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:01:56 GMT

Not really a difference. It's essentially an idiomatic suggestion, nowadays. "Let us" would literally translate as "allow us", but it more closely means "we should/should we/how about we/why don't we".

Saying "let us" only differs from "let's" in nuance. They mean exactly the same thing. "Let us" might be a bit more formal because it's not a contraction. Or it might be used emphatically. "Let's" is fast, it's easy to say, more suited for fast speech or making a 'quick suggestion'. Also, it can take away emphasis from the "us" and so cause the emphasis to be placed on the verb: "Let's GO".

They're completely interchangeable, though. Say whichever your prefer, no one should 'bat an eye-lash'. Rather, it's unlikely anyone will care, even if they notice.

Re: difference between the two sentence?

Avangi — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 05:12:30 GMT

Hi F11,

I'd say yes and yes. I believe the shortened version is colloquial - certainly not formal. A compromise would be the contraction, You'd better do your homework.

Is syntaxically a word? I was thinking syntactically. I'd better look it up!

Regards, - A.

Edit. Ha! I was right! syntactically

Re: Which one is more correct? and what are the difference between them?

Nef — Thu, 27 Dec 2007 01:02:35 GMT

Encountered is much more formal than met, but both are correct in your sentence.

Ran into is not correct in your example, but run into (very informal) would work.

(Ran is simple past tense. Have run is an example of the present perfect tense.

You've is the contraction for You have.)

Re: PLEASE HELP ME!

Wanwo — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 07:21:23 GMT

Q Once I saw a person who typed the sentence "I will meet you very the soon".
Is the usage of definite article correct in the above mentioned sentence in quotation?

No. It should be 'very soon'

Q What is the difference between 'especially' and 'specially'?

'especially' means the characterisic talked about is most pronounced in the named thing. Eg. 'All her cats are fat, especially the black one.' - meaning the black one is the fattest.

'specially' is not really a word in my opinion but someone may correct me. Most of the time if you hear it it's simply a contraction of the word especially where people fail to clearly pronounce the e.

Q What are those type of sentences in which two helping verbs are used together? Can someone make analysis on those types of sentences in which we use have have or have had or had had together? Like, âhe has always had an avid interest in Englishâ

This takes longer to answer than I have time. Probably deserves its own post.

Q. What is âFragment Errorâ?

You need to reformat your hard drive!

Q. Have I correctly used the participle in the sentence typed below?
AS INDICATED BY THE NAME, THIS WEBSITE HAS BEEN DESIGNED EXCLUSIVELY TO REFLECT HI-TECH DEVICES!

Q. If the sentence is âHe is addicted to gamblingâ. Why would it be considered wrong if we write it like âHe is addicted to gambleâ?

Again someone who knows the grammar terms better will correct me, but I think gambling is used as a noun here - the name of the activity is gambling. He is addicted to the activity of gambling. i.e. He is addicted to gambling. 'Gamble' is a verb. In the same way you wouldn't say 'He is addicted to run', but you could say 'He is addicted to running' i.e. the activity of running. This is my understanding anyway.

PLEASE CHECK THE GRAMMAR OF THE SENTENCE TYPED BELOW:
This step is quite difficult because during the training of PPL a cadet must learn how to fly during abnormal plights of the aircraft. Twenty hours of solo flying should be accrued even before attempting the difficult exam of PPL.

(That's one bad sentence. I had to substantially rewrite it)

Re: What is the most annoying phrase in the English language?

khoff — Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:04:27 GMT

Look: if you say "Did you find out who's responsible?", why can't you say "Can I help who's next?"

Because, although I would say "Did you find out who is responsible," I would not say "Can I help who is next;" instead I would say "can I help whoever is next." Okay, although I can't explain it in terms of grammatical structure, I will try to illustrate what I mean.

First, can we agree that "who's" is a contraction of "who is," and not of "whoever is"? (That would be "whoever's.")

And, just to eliminate the can/may question and the idiomatic sense of "can I help," let's substitute these two sentences:

A. May I assist who is next in line? = "Can I help who's next?"

B. May I assist whoever is next in line? = "Can I help whoever's next?"

Now, think about the difference between these two sentences:

1. Do you know who is next in line? This means: "do you know which person is the next one in line?" "Who is next in line" refers to information. It's like saying, "Do you know the time? Do you know where the exit is? Do you know this information?"

2. Do you know whoever is next in line? This means: "are you acquainted with the person who happens to be next in line?" "Whoever is next in line" refers to a specific person. It's like saying, "Do you know John? Do you know the woman in the straw hat? Do you know this person?"

[I don't know why, in terms of linguistics or grammar, "who is next" refers to a fact and "whoever is next" refers to a person, but I "feel" very strongly that this is so. I would be most grateful if someone could explain why.]

In sentences 1 and 2, you can use "know" with either sentence because "know" has two meanings -- you can "know" information, or you can "know" a person. But the answers would not be the same:

"Do you know who's next in line?" "Yes, the tall man in the green shirt is next in line."

"Do you know whoever is next in line? "No, I don't know him but I know the woman right behind him."

In your example, "Did you find out who is responsible," you can only "find out" information. You can't "find out" a person. (You could, however, "find" a person, so you could say "Did you find whoever is responsible" -- but it would not be the same as"did you find out who is responsible." It is possible to find out who is responsible, and yet not actually find the person.)

I believe that "May I assist who is next" (or "Can I help who's next") "sounds wrong" to me because "who is next" refers to a fact or an item of information, and you don't "assist" information. You assist people, and so you need to use the construction that refers to a specific person -- that is, "whoever is next."

I agree that many people say it, and I am willing to believe from the various internet sources that it used to be quite common, and I really do not want to get into the prescriptivist/decriptivist debate, so please note that I am not insisting it's "wrong" -- I am just trying very hard to understand and explain why it bothers me. I think this I the best I can do. (Is there a smiley expresing utter exhaustion?)

Re: I'mma

Anonymous — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:41:17 GMT

Hi all,

I just wanna say that your answer is probably right. I know it means like dat and once I've known dat it means an article a as a contraction of course , for example I'ma murder weapon. but when use it as 'will' or 'gonna' we make double M, I'mma you see the difference , it's not really dat big difference but nice to know and all of these contractions came from rap music. So, you have to search more and see what does it mean in other ways like I'mma gonna do dat. You know in rap they say I done did dat and this is the difference between SE and BE. SO I hope dat will give ya a view and thank you all.

Re: did not you tell me vs didn't you tell me

CalifJim — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:17:32 GMT

It seems you knew the answer before you asked the question.

The point I was making has nothing to do with any specific rule. It has to do with the fact that it is a "rule".

"Rule" 14827739 (or whatever number you want to give it): Subjects and verbs agree in number.
"Rule" 40378299 (or whatever): In forming an interrogative, do not invert the negative not with the verb unless it is attached as a contraction to the verb.

In short, I consider Do not you agree? ungrammatical, not just unidiomatic.

The division between ungrammatical and unidiomatic is not fixed. In either case you end up with a structure that is not intentionally used by native speakers. Maybe I draw the line differently than others. I don't see why that's such a problem.

(If you want to discuss the difference between grammaticality and idiomaticity further, you may want to start a thread in the linguistics forum.)

CJ

Re: the difference between but and however (Guest:Sam)

Anonymous — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 09:55:23 GMT

Hellow! Might I get an anawewr to the question below:

- What is the correct answer in the sentence below:

- Most of the things Harrods sells are cheaper in other shops, (but, however) rich people like shopping here every day.

Please tell me if it is possible to use (however) here or not. Is it a full mistake to use it this way? Is it just preferrable to use (but) here ?

What other differences, if any, are there between (but) and (however) sentences having contractions?