By Idioms, Countable nouns

Hi Tanit,prescriptivism is not for me, but I can be prescriptive on demand! Yes, in theory it should be fewer, but only if you really want to refer to "hectares", which is plural and countable. But as you know (hopefully you do know, lol), quantities followed by plural units of...

Should I just accept the fact some uncountable nouns, especially those that have abstract meanings, do not go well or don't not fit with a verb showing possession such as 'have'?Yes, you probably should accept that. It's probably a lot easier to memorize idioms with have plus a noun than to...

Another help please,My teacher told me to compose essay with the topic "American Education.. where is it leading?" Can you help me what does it mean: "where is it leading" Does he want me to tell about the situation of Vietnamese Edu or something??Second, I'd like to ask you what does this...

Thank you to all those who have posted their suggestions to my little imagination game. Some have taken it very seriously thinking they would have to relearn English after the 'changes'. This was meant to be just a game, not for those wo take everything seriously, and of course in this game...

Hi, I have writeen two sentences that contain the above-mentioned phrases and want to know why the words that follow those phrases do not seem to have articles when they appear to be countable nouns. 1.A quail is a type of small bird which is often .... (Why not, a quail is a type of (a or...

Hi guys, Idioms are tricky. You often have to use the exact wording to avoid sounding odd or unintentionally funny. The idiom for this light-hearted expression is When I kick the bucket .... and not When I kick my bucket ... Best wishes, Clive

Hello Jacek 'Jockey for position' means something like 'play tricks to gain an advantageous position'. 'Position' is used mostly as a countable noun (i.g., 'apply for a position', 'compete for a position', 'look for a position', 'run for a position', etc.). So if we make the phrase strictly...

Hello MrP So I can only assume that either Dickens got his idiom slightly wrong, or ‘Child as he was’ had a simple complementary sense in his day. I feel your sense that children are not immune to hunger and misery is very modern one. Children of poor social classes in Dickens' times would be...