http://www.englishforums.com/search/pro.htm?q=tag%3aExpressions+tag%3aSentencesSearch results for 'tag:Expressions tag:Sentences' matching tags 'Expressions' and 'Sentences'en-USXMOD (Build: 3715.30106)http://www.englishforums.com/English/ToGetTheStoryBefore/mpqvz/post.htmWed, 10 Mar 2010 07:03:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1080644vocaboboboHello. I found an expression that is a bit difficult for me to interpret, and hope someone could explain to me how I should interpret it. The expression is from a news article describing how the White House is utilizing the internet as a new medium to broadcast their ideas, plans, etc. and to communicate with people. The following sentence contains the expression, which is italicized: Just 30 years ago, White House press aides could work with only a handful of reporters and producers to get their story before 50 million network news viewers every night and all over the papers the next morning. Does the word before in this context mean, like, in the eyes of ? Please help, and thank you so much in advance.http://www.englishforums.com/English/IdiomAsOpposedTo/mppdm/post.htmTue, 09 Mar 2010 23:37:41 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1080345english 1b3The idiom 'as opposed to' I assume is followed by a noun (object of the preposition to). In the following sentence I copied from this forum, 'there' follows the idiom. Can someone please explain why 'there' can follow this expression and not always an object? the antecedent noun and the relative pronoun are fused into the relative pronoun whoever/whomever inside the relative clause, as opposed to there being an antecedent outside the relative clause. Thankshttp://www.englishforums.com/English/CanCheckSentences/mphxj/post.htm#1078594Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:07:53 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1078594mister micawberI don't speak French competently, so all I can do is correct your English expression, not its content: 1/ We have been pooling our resources for ten years . (Cela fait dix ans que nous mettons en commun nos ressources) 2/ Joining a club / a social group is important for children schooled at home. (Rejoindre une association est important pour les enfants scolarisés chez eux) 3/ He was punished for lying to his parents.-- OK (Il a été puni pour avoir menti à ses parents) 4/ After graduation, he decided to get a job . (Après avoir obtenu son diplôme, il décida de travailler)http://www.englishforums.com/English/MeaningOfTheSentence/mpwjb/post.htm#1078552Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:10:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1078552sandy ho"thanks to rounding error" means "this kind of error is caused by rounding". thanks here is not to thank someone ,it's just an expression stands for "because of". and also you can blame it. Am I right?http://www.englishforums.com/English/MeaningOfTheSentence/mpwjb/post.htmMon, 08 Mar 2010 03:53:15 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1078413burandaHi, I am currently reading computer programming books and it says: "If we store 0.1 in a float variable, we may later find that the variable has a value such as 0.09987 , thanks to rounding error ." FIrstly, I know the meaning of each stentence above, but I just dont' get any idea of how the last two highlighted expresstions are related to each other. I mean, from the sentence, I will get to know the actual value of the variable is going to be 0.09999999999987 but I don't know why I need to thank to rounding error. "thanks to rounding error" part is just not clear to me. What is the expression "thanks to rounding error" trying to say? Thanks.http://www.englishforums.com/English/IveTriedCorrectingTheseSentences-Help/mpbcc/post.htm#1077171Sat, 06 Mar 2010 21:42:23 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1077171billjYou're more protected on a moped than a motorcycle. OK - She would give me money to go buy food. OK - She's pretty but the second she opens her mouth, it kills it. Her teeth are so ugly. how would you say this - I (would) imagine it('d) annoy you to lose the money. Coming from someone like you I never thought you would do that. (seems like COMING doesn't go with the rest?) Here are my suggestions: - You're more protected on a moped than (on) a motorcycle . This looks okay unchanged. You could insert the ellipted on if you wish, but it's not essential. - She would give me money to buy food (with). Some would accept your 'idiomatic' version, but it would be safer to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/MyHandsPainingCureSomeone-Habit/mxjxn/post.htm#1074043Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:25:58 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1074043cliveHi, My hands are paining like a hell having written continuously 3 hours (in my notebook). My hands are paining having beaten my students(kids) but they(students) don't seem to be cured from their bad habits(bad habits = not doing homework, not listening to teacher's lecture). My children is a very rogue and bad person. It's now upto you to cure him from his bad habits. Please correct my sentences and I'm also looking for a word to mean "to cure someone from someone's bad habits or something like that" To reform him? My hands are hurting like hell because I have been writing continuously for 3 hours (in my notebook). Hurting like hell is an informal expression. ...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HowSpecificThingShop/mxhcv/post.htmWed, 03 Mar 2010 00:42:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1073095q81269192Hi teachers, sometimes I want to ask a particular product in the shop, but I don't know how can I start the sentence. If I directly translate from my own language, I usually say: Is there have XXX? I am not sure if this expression is correct, but sometimes it works. So I just wish to confirm if this is right or not and is there have any other way to deliver my meaning? Thanks in advancehttp://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseTellFollowingSentencesNatural/mxdpg/post.htm#1072199Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:47:10 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1072199dimsumexpressThis is my take: Please tell me if the following sentences are natural. 1. I like songs written by Paul McCartney. It means: In general, I like songs written by John. Does this mean I like Paul's songs Yes, (with some exceptions)? I don't see exception being suggested here. Is this a little ambiguous expression? No, not at all. 2. I like the songs written by Paul McCartney. The - is not needed in this question without being used in conjunction. It seems the Q and A don't quite sound compatible. Does this mean I like all Paul's songs (or songs that I mentioned before, depending on the context)? If is used in the context, yes. 3. I like songs written by British pop artists. ...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseTellFollowingSentencesNatural/mxdpg/post.htm#1072180Tue, 02 Mar 2010 05:23:04 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1072180mister micawber1. I like songs written by Paul McCartney. Does this mean I like Paul's songs (with some exceptions)?-- With or without exceptions. Is this a little ambiguous expression?-- Yes 2. I like the songs written by Paul McCartney. Does this mean I like all Paul's songs (or songs that I mentioned before, depending on the context)?-- Yes 3. I like songs written by British pop artists. Does this mean I like (just any) songs written by (just any) British pop artists?-- Just any or some not yet specified. 4. Songs written by Paul McCartney are my favorite ones. Does this mean I like Paul's songs (with some exceptions)? -- As with #1 Is this a little ambiguous expression? - As with #1 5. The songs written by Paul McCartney are my...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseTellFollowingSentencesNatural/mxdpg/post.htmTue, 02 Mar 2010 05:03:00 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1072162snappyPlease tell me if the following sentences are natural. 1. I like songs written by Paul McCartney. Does this mean I like Paul's songs (with some exceptions)? Is this a little ambiguous expression? 2. I like the songs written by Paul McCartney. Does this mean I like all Paul's songs (or songs that I mentioned before, depending on the context)? 3. I like songs written by British pop artists. Does this mean I like (just any) songs written by (just any) British pop artists? 4. Songs written by Paul McCartney are my favorite ones. Does this mean I like Paul's songs (with some exceptions)? Is this a little ambiguous expression? 5. The songs written...http://www.englishforums.com/English/PleaseAdvertisementDeconstruction/mxbln/post.htmMon, 01 Mar 2010 15:12:50 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1071523lockieleonardAdvertisement that is deconstructed. This is a part of of my advertisement deconstruction that I have written (the advertisement is attached), I would really highly appreciate it if you could please proof read it and correct or suggest anything that can be improved grammatically and sentence structure construction as well as if there are better vocabularies to use: Here it is Good morning class, and Mr. Petri Readers are invited to read this advertisement in various types of ways .The way each reader will interpret the thought behind this advertisement is dependent upon their values, beliefs, thoughts, backgrounds and marriage status . For example, signifiers such as the rings, fresh coloured flowers,...http://www.englishforums.com/English/ForATimePass/mnvkn/post.htm#1068391Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:54:09 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1068391user_garyThanks Nona the Brit. So I think "time pass" is incorrect expression which is more common in my part of the world. Anyway, I've tried to rephrase the sentences as per your suggestions. I always like to sit at our doorsteps and watch out for girls passing by our house. This is my usual way to pass my time. The movie will be aired/screened at 5 p.m. exactly in the theatre but we have come almost 2 hours earlier (3 p.m.). So now we shall loiter around to pass up time and come back at 4.45 p.m. I roam/wander/loiter around in the vicinity of our house during evening time to pass my time.http://www.englishforums.com/English/UnrealTenses/mnzwv/post.htmThu, 25 Feb 2010 21:30:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1067706english 1b3Unreal tenses use the past tense for present situations and the past perfect for past situations. For example: "I would rather we had never met" =past perfect for past time "I would rather you smoked outside." = past for present time But what about these (where the sentence is no longer complex): "I would rather kick the ball" = present situation, using modal tense, not the past tense "I would rather have kicked the ball" = using modal perfect tense for past situation 1) Is this just an exception to the rule, or is it because unreal tenses are reserved for subordinate clauses? 2) Also, why do sites say the unreal tense is the past...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IsCorrectSigningTouristRoutes/mlnjj/post.htm#1060329Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:14:18 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060329dimsumexpressCan an expression "installation of the signs" in a sentence "Installation of the signs on the tourist routes of active modes of travel" be replaced with a word "Signing" in way that i get a sentence "Signing of the tourist routes of active modes of travel" of the same meaning to the first sentence? Ok, you have too many prepositions in your sentence which are not making sense. What is "modes of travel"? I am still not sure what you have in mind by the fragmentations composed of these words. You can say" the highway maintenance crew is working on the installation of the new freeway signs" . Signage is typically referred to anything displaying an intended...http://www.englishforums.com/English/IsCorrectSigningTouristRoutes/mlnjj/post.htm#1060315Thu, 18 Feb 2010 21:49:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1060315toleranceCan an expression "installation of the signs" in a sentence "Installation of the signs on the tourist routes of active modes of travel" be replaced with a word "Signing" in way that i get a sentence "Signing of the tourist routes of active modes of travel" of the same meaning to the first sentence? Also, can an expression "installation of the signs" be replaced with a word "Signage" in a way that i get a sentence  "Signage for the tourist routes for active modes of travel" equal in meaning to the sentence "Installation of the signs on the tourist routes of active modes of travel"? When i intend to install a sign (a signboard) in the begging or in the end...http://www.englishforums.com/English/WordSomeoneHairCompletelyBaldness/mlchn/post.htm#1057965Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:47:47 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1057965user_garyThank you RayH. Can also I say "He is shaved now"? to mean his head is bald now because he is shaved? I wrote this expression considering the sentence "He is bald now" when someone is naturally bald.http://www.englishforums.com/English/WouldHypotheticalSentence/mlzgh/post.htmTue, 16 Feb 2010 13:34:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1057849bamtoriTeachers, I know this expression, " would like to do something ", " would you like (to do something)?", is used for offer or invitataion, and I'm wondering if this is a hypothetical sentence. If it is, then what would be the "if" clause? Would it be "if I might"? or something? Thanks so much!http://www.englishforums.com/English/Like/mldrd/post.htm#1057320Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:22:55 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1057320billjwonder if "1" is correct grammatically. If so, I wonder if "2" is correct. 1. It was like a dream come true. It is correct because it is commonly used. It is one of those expressions that have been used so long that they have become accepted usage even though they are ungrammatical . Come is an intransitive verb and such verbs are not normally used in structures like this. If we replace the verb come with another intransitive verb , the sentence may not sound so good: This is an excellent example of what is difficult about English: lack of logic and consistency. CB But it's not ungrammatical! It may be an idiom, but it's still grammatical because it...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Like/mldrd/post.htm#1057249Mon, 15 Feb 2010 22:33:01 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1057249cool breezewonder if "1" is correct grammatically. If so, I wonder if "2" is correct. 1. It was like a dream come true. It is correct because it is commonly used. It is one of those expressions that have been used so long that they have become accepted usage even though they are ungrammatical. Come is an intransitive verb and such verbs are not normally used in structures like this. If we replace the verb come with another intransitive verb , the sentence may not sound so good: It was a dream happened many times before. It was a dream arrived none too soon. This is an excellent example of what is difficult about English: lack of logic and consistency. CBhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/TakeThroughHoldLove/mklkn/post.htm#1055822Sun, 14 Feb 2010 13:54:03 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1055822user_garyThanks a lot again Mr. Wordy. But as you know I'm so stupid to understand it yet, I again failed to understand it. But I don't want to give it up as I feel "take through" is a common phrase and I must learn it. So I think it would be better if you explain to me the meaning of the whole expressions "Khan's journey to meet President takes him through modern America post 9/11 " instead of just "takes through". I will then try to grasp it. Though I understand "Khan want to meet USA president to explain he is not a terrorist". But I wonder what they want to convey by adding "modern America post 9/11" in the sentence. I think here the phrase "take through" needs to...http://www.englishforums.com/English/AdverbsOrAjectives/mkgqq/post.htm#1054743Sat, 13 Feb 2010 11:22:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1054743billjI’m sorry but I disagree. It’s very common to say ‘I fly American/United/Lufthansa/El Al’ and so on. The meaning of such expressions is widely understood. The word ‘American’ is functioning as a noun here. Even when used in a prepositional phrase such as ‘by American’ it’s still a noun, although at sentence level the phrase itself can function as an Adverbial clause element. Of course, if we change or rearrange the words in a sentence, it can sometimes change the analysis: if, for example, the sentence was recast as ‘I fly by/with American’, that would indeed be SVA. But why change the sentence as it was posted? There’s no syntactic reason to do so. The point is that in ‘I fly American’, the verb ‘fly’...http://www.englishforums.com/English/EvenDidntUsedUsedThere/mjggc/post.htm#1054212Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:14:35 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1054212mr wordyI'm sorry mr Wordy. I didn't know it was wrong not to spell out the numbers. In casual written English, you will often see small numbers written as numerals ("1", "2", "3" etc.), but this looks sloppy even in moderately formal contexts. If you want to use English "properly" (which, since you are here, I assume you do), then it is better to write these in words ("one", "two", "three" etc.). This applies only to numbers embedded in sentences in ordinary text. It obviously doesn't apply to numbers in tables, graphs, numbered lists, mathematical expressions and similar. (Even) if you had a gun to my head I wouldn't do it . (Even) if you...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Beins/mkwcn/post.htm#1053745Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:14:34 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1053745mister micawberIt is not a colloquialism; I have never seen that before. Judging from your sentence, I suppose you mean ' being ', whose pronunciation might be transcribed as 'bein' in dialogue. This, however, should not be used in written English unless it is a direct quotation with the goal of representing a dialect.http://www.englishforums.com/English/QuantifyingExpressions/mkgmj/post.htm#1053349Fri, 12 Feb 2010 03:20:37 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1053349califjimI just want to know the explanations of Quantifying Expressions... Your question is too broad. Books have been written on the subject. What exactly do you need to have explained? Please restrict your question to a specific sentence or two, or to a specific quantifying expression or two. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/Ago/mkrlr/post.htm#1051933Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:51:07 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1051933califjimIs this sentence correct? It has been a long time ago. No. a long time ago is "definite time" grammatically even though the exact meaning in terms of a point in time is somewhat vague. Present perfect tense can't be used with definite time. Don't use it with any expression ending in ago . Use: It was a long time ago. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/HowCanConstructASentence/mjjnb/post.htm#1049406Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:52:52 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1049406iwanttofly4I want to help you, but am so sorry that I do not know how to. Please ask in a more specific way, for example, you may give us an expression that you wish to write and ask how we can do that.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ByDoingThis/mjhwj/post.htmSun, 07 Feb 2010 19:10:54 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1048637antonijaHello, can you please see if the sentence is OK. Should I find better expression here?Thank you We constantly coordinate our demands and interests with our surroundings and by doing this we actually conduct negotiations all the time without being aware of it.http://www.englishforums.com/English/InformalConstructionUngrammatical-Grammatical/mjgrh/post.htm#1048292Sun, 07 Feb 2010 12:02:32 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1048292gleb_chebrikoffTa. So the omission of the bold words above would be seen as strict ellipsis, which is surely grammatical, correct? - one of the criteria for strict ellipsis is that the missing expression is precisely recoverable. This does not agree with the above. the subject and verb to be can always be removed if the subject is repeated elsewhere in the sentence. - examples are welcome for us to be more precise.http://www.englishforums.com/English/ForThatMatterComeToThat/mjbcg/post.htm#1047268Sat, 06 Feb 2010 12:35:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1047268mr wordyMy daughter is coming down with the flu. For that matter , most of her friends at the kindergarten are coming down with it too. Why shouldn’t John, or anybody in this class, for that matter , do this? In sentences such as your #1, they all have roughly the same role You mean #2? I was told elsewhere that #1 needed a more impressive, striking clause to qualify for the phrase 'come to that. No, I meant #1. For me, "Come to that" is possible in #1 (albeit the "come ... coming" repetition is awkward) -- but I do not disagree with the general thesis that it often introduces a "more impressive, striking clause". I intended such differences in emphasis to fall within the scope of my...http://www.englishforums.com/English/HeIsWellRead/mwmnj/post.htm#1045282Thu, 04 Feb 2010 16:52:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1045282rayhHe is well read.. This sentence is being understood as meaning "He reads a lot". Not exactly. The usual meaning is that someone who is "well-read" is very knowledgeable, usually in a wide range of fields, through having read extensively. For example, someone who reads a lot of romance novels or westerns to the exclusion of everything else would not normally be said to be well-read. See this page for the formal definitions: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/well-read I don't know if this expression is considered an idiom but it probably should be.http://www.englishforums.com/English/SentenceAnalysisWithIdiom/mwchw/post.htm#1042396Tue, 02 Feb 2010 05:58:02 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1042396califjimAre the two phrase s 'to the point that' and 'to the point of' idiomatic expressions functioning as conjuctions? Yes. I think that's an accurate characterization. Is the adverbial phrase in bold modifying the verb 'I can spend' ...? No. I would say it modifies the verb worry . I worry. a) How much? ... to the point ... and to the point .... b) When? ... mainly when she comes home crying. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/SentenceAnalysisWithIdiom/mwchw/post.htmTue, 02 Feb 2010 02:48:46 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1042261english 1b3I worry about what others say to my daughter, to the point/extent that I can spend hours worrying about it and to the point/extent of minor depression , especially/mainly when she comes home crying . Are the two phrase 'to the point that' and 'to the point of' idiomatic expressions functioning as conjuctions? Is the adverbial phrase in bold modifying the verb 'I can spend' (it can't modify the noun depression though...)? Thankshttp://www.englishforums.com/English/SuggestSubjunctiveOrNot/4/mhzqq/Post.htm#1041293Mon, 01 Feb 2010 03:58:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1041293dimsumexpressHi Mr. Wordy, Appreciate your comments... My particular interest on this discussion is to settle my own doubts in the correct usage of the subjunctives. I was taught that when we use verbs of mandative nature, the verb following the "that" clause should be in its base form, as highlihted in blue below. Some comments came along in the discussion with a mention about the use of past form of the mandative words which theoretically changes the property of the subjunctive sentence. This certainly complicates and deepens the question. It's pretty clear that there is a BrE and AmR usage variance in the mandative words relative to the subjunctive moods. By the way, I am not disagreeing with your approval of this...http://www.englishforums.com/English/RelativeClausePrepositions/2/mgklk/Post.htm#1040398Sun, 31 Jan 2010 07:44:28 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1040398english 1b3My apprehension about this dissipated after the first 10 minutes, by that point I knew that I was in great hands. That was why I suggested the unorthodox term 'relative determiner' if you really need to name the function of which in those sentences. You seem to understand the function quite well without a fancy name, though. Yes, your sentence explains exactly what I mean, assuming you agree your version is incorrect. 'that' has no relative function here, while 'which' does. And thanks to you also, Bill. Your explanation was thorough. At the moment of which At the time of which After which time All are grammatical, prepositional phrases--though I can't really...http://www.englishforums.com/English/LostLossConfused/mhjgj/post.htm#1039388Sat, 30 Jan 2010 08:09:39 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1039388dnguha"loss" is a noun, while "lost" is the past participle form of "lose". Therefore, " The lakers loss the game." is wrong. It should be "The lakers lost the game". Likewise, the sentence "my toy is loss" is wrong, and it will be " my toy is lost". "loss" should be used as noun. For example, 1 The businessman suffered a huge loss . 2 I have lost my toy and the loss is due to my negligence. 3 "asianbma is always at a loss regarding the uses of lost and loss". Here, the expression " at a loss" means confusedhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ThenIfItIsGotToBe/mhzhw/post.htm#1038769Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:36:14 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1038769user_garyThanks a lot Micahel S I got the sentence meaning but I think I'm still bemused with the usage of the expression "but then" here.http://www.englishforums.com/English/PossessivePronounsGerunds/2/mhbqg/Post.htm#1038401Fri, 29 Jan 2010 12:17:45 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1038401mr wordyIt corresponds to this dictionary definition of the noun vote: the right to such expression: to give women the vote. H.W. Fowler wrote these sentences, so I'm sure they are corect. (but it sounds archaic to me as well; I prefer the right to vote) In BrE, "having the vote", "getting the vote" etc. are OK in this sense (not archaic or particularly odd in any way). E.g.: "Women first got the vote in 1918."http://www.englishforums.com/English/PossessivePronounsGerunds/mhbqg/post.htm#1038174Fri, 29 Jan 2010 07:37:55 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1038174ferdisI somehow found myself staring at these two sentences for mintues, trying to lay my finger on what it is that make my ear twitch. First of all, I thought "vote" should be in plural. They both seemed to look grammatically ok at first, but the phrases, "having the vote" and "women's having the vote" just have that odd ring to it. Any idea? It could be just me.. It corresponds to this dictionary definition of the noun vote: the right to such expression: to give women the vote. H.W. Fowler wrote these sentences, so I'm sure they are corect. (but it sounds archaic to me as well; I prefer the right to vote)http://www.englishforums.com/English/IWordChangeTheseSentencesQuestions/mgnkn/post.htm#1036368Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:50:52 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1036368philipthere shape (physical); form (mental, spiritual) /either expression is ok it's that's All are grammatical, but the first is by far the more natural the two teams were tiedhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/ArticlesAAnVsThe/mglmz/post.htm#1036149Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:33:49 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1036149ivanhrThanks for your replies. I know the rules and I know the answers. But how can you explain the use of (an) when all the grammar rules indicate the use of (the). What is worse is that this question was written in a grammar book after explaining the rules to find out that item 5 is not in accordance with the taught rules!!! No, you just misunderstood the rules. The last sentence, just like sentence #3 is an example of the use of 'a/an' in classifying expressions (as opposed to identifying BLOCKED EXPRESSION. The owner of the hotel is already identified with the pronoun 'he' and the predicate is there to describe the man in more detail. In fact, when you say he's a nice man...http://www.englishforums.com/English/Confused/vbnrb/post.htm#1035631Wed, 27 Jan 2010 01:25:31 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1035631califjimconfusion state is this sentence correct??? confusion state isn't a sentence. It's an expression made up of two words, and it's not correct, no. a state of confusion would be OK if it were used correctly in a sentence. CJhttp://www.englishforums.com/English/UseOfNoSonner/mgkpx/post.htm#1035020Tue, 26 Jan 2010 14:06:19 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1035020james doHi, I think it will take you less time to search it in google, than wait for the answer here. Firstly, it is a comparatives of "soon", so you must use "than" with it. I know two way of using "no longer". no sooner than something : not before a certain point of time. Ex : This report will be done no sooner than next week. no sooner do A than do B : right after A happens, B happens too. Ex : No sooner had I arrived here than it started to rain. It mean "immediately after I had arrived here, it started to rain." Notice that when "no sooner" start the sentence, you must invert the subject and verb in the clause right after "no sooner", as well as...http://www.englishforums.com/English/DoorsCouldWalkThroughWithout-KnockingShut/mghlj/post.htm#1033962Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:43:03 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1033962ed_shawI think the sentence is fine. Consider a comma after ultimately. I am assuming the question surrounds the use of "doors were shut on me." That is a somewhat colorful and creative expression to mean "closed to (or for) me." We think of a door being closed "on" someone's fingers. Again, my opinion is "natural."http://www.englishforums.com/English/ItsBeen/mgrdd/post.htm#1031810Sat, 23 Jan 2010 14:54:13 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1031810dokterjokkebrok'It's been two weeks' means ' It has been two weeks up until the present '. If something starts in the past and continues up until somewhere around the present, you have to use the Present Perfect. Contextualizing, this may be: 'It's been two weeks since I had a smoke.' (two weeks ago I stopped smoking, and I'm still not smoking today ). What you mean is a sentence that requires the simple past because of a clear expression of past time . Yesterday I bought some fruit. Two weeks ago I saw him eat an apple. Last month I worked 8 days in a row. Difference here is that all actions are done. They're finished and not connected to the present in any way, whereas It's been two weeks is ...http://www.englishforums.com/English/DidUnderstandBoldedSentence/mzzqr/post.htm#1028733Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:01:59 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1028733mr wordyThe expression "in the Captain's pay" is an outdated idiom meaning "on the payroll of highwaymen or robbers." Aha, that clears it up. I've never heard that idiom. (By the way, toiletbowels, are you aware that the user name you've chosen is not pleasant?)http://www.englishforums.com/English/DidUnderstandBoldedSentence/mzzqr/post.htm#1028715Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:16:57 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1028715rose bowlNo, that's not the correct interpretation of this sentence. The expression "in the Captain's pay" is an outdated idiom meaning "on the payroll of highwaymen or robbers." "Plots and conspiracies were often hatched under an inn roof, and it was a well-known fact that highwaymen used to be in touch with hostlers and other servants of many a house of public entertainment, giving rich bribes to learn about the wealth or condition of the guests who were to start on their travels in the morning. There was no hostelry so respectable but some of its servants might be "in the Captain's pay" -- such was the term for those who received bribes from highwaymen."...http://www.englishforums.com/English/SentenceProblemPlsHelp/mzvhb/post.htmTue, 19 Jan 2010 06:42:33 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1028093miyabiHi everybody, i always have problem of expressing my thought in Eng. I don't know if the words I chose is good enough, and very often i'm not sure if i'm using the correct grammar. Pls help to correct and advise better expression of the following sentence: My situation: i got married last year, and had a great time in 2009. The wedding is so wonderful and unforgettable. Here in the New Year time, we would like to say thank you to my firends and relatives. However, I don't know how to express in words that this is our very first and special new year being as a couple of us after marriage, and we're glad to share our happiness and give our sinecere blessings to our friends. Could I say it in...http://www.englishforums.com/English/TryingLittle/mzvrd/post.htm#1028004Tue, 19 Jan 2010 01:50:08 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1028004mr wordyRight, I see what you're saying. Personally I don't have a problem with it, and I think the sentence is fine. Yes, the literal meaning of "hunkering down" is that of physically crouching down, digging in, or whatever, but here the author obviously doesn't mean that. He's using the expression figuratively. Huge numbers of English words or phrases that express physical acts or situations have various levels of figurative meaning, and this is a case in point.http://www.englishforums.com/English/TryingLittle/mzvrd/post.htm#1027983Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:30:48 GMT946f00bb-57d3-4b7b-a9a2-059b5341af52:1027983mr wordyI am having a feeling that the writer is trying to say too much with too little. I don't quite understand what you mean by this. The sentence seems well written to me. A. In any case, the Europeans would rather have elected someone they are familiar with, despite her imperfections. B. Although the Europeans are familiar with her imperfection, they would still have elected Hillary. (A) paraphrases it nicely. The combination of "hunkered down with" is rather usual. Did you mean to say "usual" or "unusual"? Anyway, "to hunker down (with)" is a standard expression. See e.g. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hunker