Search results for 'tag:Images tag:Marriage' matching tags 'Images' and 'Marriage'

Re: Which one is correct? (conditional clause)

Goodman — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:56:34 GMT

Yoong Liat wrote:
Hi Goodman
I searched for 'run into troubles' but found 'run into trouble' instead. The following is just one of the extracts.

Oxford University Google Search

Oxford University > Search Oxford University > Search Results

powered by

Search the Web Search ox.ac.uk

Web Searched pages from ox.ac.uk for run into troubles. (0.06 seconds)

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
(If you run into trouble with this the simplest option is to abort the integral routine and try again!). You. may now have to adjust the slope of the ...
www.chem.ox.ac.uk/spectroscopy/nmr/PDFs/ac_user.PDF - Similar pages

Liat,

Fine, if you believe and insist that what you learned is true, I don't want you to change your opinion on my behalf.

I know you searched for "if you run into trouble...".Have you tried others? (when you..../ should you.../ in case you ...?

My point is, the book's answers don't always explain everything. In this case, "troubles" as in the plural context discussed, is just as valid as it's singular cousin.

One can have trouble with marriage, job and finance at the same time, so what is wrong with plurals, as in "having troubles"!

Poetic forms: The English sonnet. From Wikipedia,

Hayatoukrama — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 23:10:27 GMT

[edit] The English sonnet

William Shakespeare, in the famous "Chandos" portrait. Artist and authenticity unconfirmed. National Portrait Gallery (UK).

Sonnets were introduced by Thomas Wyatt in the early 16th century. His sonnets and those of his contemporary the Earl of Surrey were chiefly translations from the Italian of Petrarch and the French of Ronsard and others. While Wyatt introduced the sonnet into English, it was Surrey who gave them the rhyme scheme, meter, and division into quatrains that now characterizes the English sonnet. Sir Philip Sidney's sequence Astrophil and Stella (1591) started a tremendous vogue for sonnet sequences: the next two decades saw sonnet sequences by William Shakespeare, Edmund Spenser, Michael Drayton, Samuel Daniel, Fulke Greville, William Drummond of Hawthornden, and many others.These sonnets were all essentially inspired by the Petrarchan tradition, and generally treat of the poet's love for some woman; the exception is Shakespeare's sequence. In the 17th century, the sonnet was adapted to other purposes, with John Donne and George Herbert writing religious sonnets, and John Milton using the sonnet as a general meditative poem. Both the Shakespearean and Petrarchan rhyme schemes were popular throughout this period, as well as many variants.

The fashion for the sonnet went out with the Restoration, and hardly any sonnets were written between 1670 and Wordsworth's time. However, sonnets came back strongly with the French Revolution. Wordsworth himself wrote several sonnets, of which the best-known are "The world is too much with us" and the sonnet to Milton; his sonnets were essentially modelled on Milton's. Keats and Shelley also wrote major sonnets; Keats's sonnets used formal and rhetorical patterns inspired partly by Shakespeare, and Shelley innovated radically, creating his own rhyme scheme for the sonnet "Ozymandias". Sonnets were written throughout the 19th century, but, apart from Elizabeth Barrett Browning's Sonnets from the Portuguese and the sonnets of Dante Gabriel Rossetti, there were few very successful traditional sonnets. Gerard Manley Hopkins wrote several major sonnets, often in sprung rhythm, of which the greatest is "The Windhover," and also several sonnet variants such as the 10-1/2 line curtal sonnet "Pied Beauty" and the 24-line caudate sonnet "That Nature is a Heraclitean Fire." By the end of the 19th century, the sonnet had been adapted into a general-purpose form of great flexibility.

This flexibility was extended even further in the 20th century. Among the major poets of the early Modernist period, Robert Frost, Edna St. Vincent Millay and E. E. Cummings all used the sonnet regularly. William Butler Yeats wrote the major sonnet Leda and the Swan, which used half rhymes. Wilfred Owen's sonnet Anthem for Doomed Youth was another sonnet of the early 20th century. W.H. Auden wrote two sonnet sequences and several other sonnets throughout his career, and widened the range of rhyme-schemes used considerably. Auden also wrote one of the first unrhymed sonnets in English, "The Secret Agent" (1928). Half-rhymed, unrhymed, and even unmetrical sonnets have been very popular since 1950; perhaps the best works in the genre are Seamus Heaney's Glanmore Sonnets and Clearances, both of which use half rhymes, and Geoffrey Hill's mid-period sequence 'An Apology for the Revival of Christian Architecture in England'. The 1990s saw something of a formalist revival, however, and several traditional sonnets have been written in the past decade.

[edit] Form

Soon after the introduction of the Italian sonnet, English poets began to develop a fully native form. These poets included Sir Philip Sidney, Michael Drayton, Samuel Daniel, the Earl of Surrey's nephew Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford and William Shakespeare. The form is often named after Shakespeare, not because he was the first to write in this form but because he became its most famous practitioner. The form consists of three quatrains and a couplet. The couplet generally introduced an unexpected sharp thematic or imagistic "turn" called a volta. The usual rhyme scheme was a-b-a-b, c-d-c-d, e-f-e-f, g-g. In addition, sonnets are written in iambic pentameter, meaning that there are 10 syllables per line, and that every other syllable is naturally accented.

This example, Shakespeare's Sonnet 116, illustrates the form:

Let me not to the marriage of true minds (a)
Admit impediments. Love is not love (b)
Which alters when it alteration finds, (a)
Or bends with the remover to remove. (b)

O no, it is an ever fixed mark (c)
That looks on tempests and is never shaken; (d)
It is the star to every wand'ring barque, (c)
Whose worth's unknown although his height be taken. (d)

Love's not time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks (e)
Within his bending sickle's compass come; (f)
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, (e)
But bears it out even to the edge of doom. (f)

If this be error and upon me proved, (g)
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.

Love VS Marriage*

Justafriend_786 — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:36:11 GMT

salam alaikum

Love VS Marriage*

Love is holding hands in the street.
Marriage is holding arguments in the street.

Love is dinner for 2 in your favorite restaurant.

Marriage is a fast food take-out.

Love is cuddling on a sofa.

Marriage is deciding on a sofa
Love is talking about having children.
Marriage is talking about getting away
from children.

Love is going to bed early.

Marriage is going to sleep early.

Love is a romantic drive.

Marriage is a tarmac drive.

Love is losing your appetite.
Marriage is losing your figure.

Love is sweet nothing in the ear.

Marriage is sweet nothing in the bank.

Love is a flickering flame.
Marriage is a flickering television.

Love is 1 drink and 2 straws.

Marriage is "Don't you think you've had enough!".

In short love is Blind...

AND

Marriage is an eye opener!!!!!

copyed

Marital Woes

Justafriend_786 — Mon, 19 Mar 2007 23:23:16 GMT

hi everyone

im a new member and this is my first topic

i hope all of you like it

Getting married is very much like going to a restaurant with friends. You order what you want, then when you see what the other person has, you wish you had ordered that.

*********

Man: Is there any way for long life?
Dr: Get married.

Man: Will it help?
Dr: No, but the thought of long life will never come.

*********

Why do couples hold hands during their wedding?

It's a formality just like two boxers shaking hands before the fight begins!

*********

Wife: Darling today is our anniversary, what should we do?

Husband: Let us stand in silence for 2 minutes.

*********

It's funny when people discuss Love Marriage vs Arranged.

It's like asking someone, if suicide is better or being murdered

********

If u r married please ignore this MSG,

For everyone else: Happy Independence Day

*********

Before marriage, a man will lie awake all night thinking about something you say.

After marriage, he'll fall asleep before you finish.

*********

There's a way of transferring funds that is even faster than electronic banking. It's called marriage

*********

Galfriends r like chocolates,
Taste gud anytime.

Lovers r like PIZZAS, Hot n spicy, eaten frequently.
Wife r like Dal RICE, eaten when there`s no choice

*********

Man receives telegram: Wife deadshould be buried or cremated?

Man: Don't take any chances. Burn the body and bury the ash.

*********

Prospective husband: Do you have a book called 'Man, The Master of Women'?

Salesgirl: The fiction department is on the other side, sir.

*********

Q: Why dogs don't marry?

A: Because they are already leading a dog's life!

*********

There was this guy who told his woman that he loved her so much that he would go through hell for her. They got married and now he is going thru hell.

*********

Fact of life: One woman brings you into this world crying & the other ensures you continue to do so for the rest of your life!

*********

Q: Why doesn't law permit a man to marry a second woman?

A: Because as per law you cannot be punished twice for the same offence!

*********
copyed

Re: Islam:veiling women!

Nrbn — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 07:47:05 GMT

The position of women in Islam has recently been an issue of debate. Some misconceptions arise, either from traditional practices which are thought to be "Islamic," but are not, or else from prejudices. However, the real issue is how women are regarded in the Islamic faith, and when we look at this, we see that Islam gives women great social value, freedom and comfort.

Women in the Qur'an

God's commandments about the status of women and the relations between men and women, which have been revealed to us through the Qur'an, consist of full justice. In this regard, Islam suggests equality of rights, responsibilities and duties between the two genders. Islam is based on sympathy, tolerance and respect for human beings, and does not discriminate against women in this matter.

The examples of good morals communicated to us in the Qur'an are universally compatible with human nature, and are valid for all stages of history.

Respect for women and women's rights fall within this. In the Qur'an God insists that the tasks and responsibilities of women are the same as those of men. Furthermore, while performing these tasks and responsibilities men and women must help and support each other:

The men and women of the believers are friends of one another. They command what is right and forbid what is wrong, and establish prayer and pay alms, and obey Allah and His Messenger. They are the people on whom Allah will have mercy. Allah is Almighty, All Wise. (Qur'an, 9:71)

God emphasizes that believers will be rewarded in the same manner according to their deeds, regardless of their gender.

Their Lord responds to them: 'I will not let the deeds of any doer among you go to waste, male or female - you are both the same in that respect... (Qur'an, 3:195)

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of what they did. (Qur'an, 16:97)

In another verse, Muslim men and women are considered together, and it is stressed that both have the same responsibility and status in God's sight:

Men and women who are Muslims, men and women who are believers, men and women who are obedient, men and women who are truthful, men and women who are steadfast, men and women who are humble, men and women who give alms, men and women who fast, men and women who guard their private parts, men and women who remember Allah much: Allah has prepared forgiveness for them and an immense reward. (Qur'an, 33:35)

In the Qur'an there are many more verses stating that men and women are exactly equal in terms of their tasks and responsibilities and their rewards or punishments in return. There are a few differences in social issues, but these are for the comfort and protection of women. The commands of the Qur'an regard the congenital differences between the two genders resulting from their creation, and suggest a system maintaining equal justice for men and women in this light.

Islam does not see women as objects. Therefore, it is not seen appropriate that a woman of good morals should marry a man of bad morals. In the same way, it is not permitted for a woman of bad morals to marry a man of good morals:

Corrupt women are for corrupt men and corrupt men are for corrupt women, Good women are for good men and good men are for good women. The latter are innocent of what they say. They will have forgiveness and generous provision. (Qur'an, 24:26)

Also as regards marriage, the duties and responsibilities of couples towards each other require equality. God demands that both spouses be protective of and supervise each other. This duty is expressed in the Qur'an in the following words.

They are covers for you and you for them... (Qur'an, 2:187)

Many rules and commandments exist in the Qur'an regarding the protection of women's rights on marriage. Marriage is based on the free will of both parties; the husband has to provide economic support for his wife (4:4); the husband has to look after his ex-wife after divorce (65:6).

The Islamic Emancipation of Women

As the verses make clear, Islam brings justice to male-female relations and puts an end to harmful practices resulting from customs and traditions of pre-Islamic societies. One example is the situation of women in pre-Islamic Arab society. The pagan Arabs regarded women as inferior, and having a daughter was something to be ashamed of. Fathers of daughters sometimes preferred to bury them alive rather than announce their birth. By means of the Qur'an, Allah prohibited this evil tradition and warned that on the Judgment Day such people will definitely have to account for their actions.

In fact, Islam brought with it a great emancipation for women, who were severely persecuted in the pagan era. Prof. Bernard Lewis, known as one of the greatest Western experts on the history of Islam and the Middle East, makes the following comment:

In general, the advent of Islam brought an enormous improvement in the position of women in ancient Arabia, endowing them with property and some other rights, and giving them a measure of protection against ill treatment by their husbands or owners. The killing of female infants, sanctioned by custom in Pagan Arabia, was outlawed by Islam. But the position of women remained poor, and worsened when, in this as in so many other respects, the original message of Islam lost its impetus and was modified under the influence of pre-existing attitudes and customs. 1

Karen Armstrong, another Western expert on Islam, makes the following comment:

We must remember what life had been like for women in the pre-Islamic period when female infanticide was the norm and when women had no rights at all. Like slaves, women were treated as an inferior species, who had no legal existence. In such a primitive world, what Muhammad achieved for women was extraordinary. The very idea that a woman could be witness or could inherit anything at all in her own right was astonishing. 2

In fact, during the many centuries that followed Prophet Muhammad, women of the Islamic societies had a much higher social position than the women of Christendom. Karen Armstrong emphasizes that, during the Middle Ages;

... the Muslims were horrified to see the way Western Christians treated their women in the Crusader states, and Christian scholars denounced Islam for giving too much power to menials like slaves and women. 3

Anna King, a modern Muslim woman and a convert - or, better to say, a revert - to Islam, explains the Islamic emancipation of women as follows:

Islam first gave women their rights in a time when women were nothing but the property of men. Islam gave women the right to buy and sell on their own, own businesses and express her views politically. These were all basic rights which the American woman was not granted until relatively recently! It also encouraged women to study and learn Islamic knowledge, breaking a ban which several religions had stipulated, which forbid women to acquire any religious knowledge or touch religious texts... It also abolished the practice of marrying a woman without her consent. Thus, one would have to be very stubborn indeed to refuse such obvious facts and proofs that Islam was women's first liberator.

The tendencies to see women as "an inferior species" who has no right for education and that must be totally secluded from the society arose much later in the Islamic world, as a result of deviations from the right Qur'anic path.

Conclusion

Thus we can say that the mentality that despises women, excludes them from society and regards them as second class citizens is a wicked pagan attitude which has no place in Islam.

In fact, devout women are depicted as good examples for mankind in the Qur'an. One is Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ. Another is the wife of the Egyptian Pharaoh who, despite her husband's wickedness, is also described as an ideal Muslim. (see, 66:11-12) The Qur'an also describes very gentle conversations between the Prophet Solomon and the Queen of Sheba (27:42-44), and between Moses and two young ladies (28:23-26), which symbolize the civilized social relationship between the two genders.

Therefore, it is impossible for a Muslim to have a bigoted approach to women. In a society where true Islamic morals are practiced, immense respect and sympathy will be shown to women, and it will be ensured that they can live in freedom and comfort.

The fundamental rule in Qur'anic exegesis is ensuring that the derived meaning is in conformity with the integrity of the Qur'an. When this is considered, it is seen that all the rules mentioned to us by Allah regarding women form a social structure allowing them to live in the most comfortable and happiest way. In a society where all the moral values mentioned by Islam are practiced comprehensively, the social position of women becomes even more exalted than in societies that we today regard as modern.

http://www.harunyahya.com/

(1) Bernard Lewis, The Middle East, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1995, p. 210
(2) Karen Armstrong, Muhammad A Biography of The Prophet, Harper Collins Publisher, USA, 1992, p.191
(3) Karen Armstrong, Muhammad A Biography of The Prophet, Harper Collins Publisher, USA, 1992, p.199

Re: Answers in a questionnaire

Goodman — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 00:43:49 GMT

Pastsimple wrote:
Hi,

one of the questions you can often find in a questionnaire is "What is your greatest achievement?" People use different grammar structures/tenses etc. when they're answering, e.g.:

gerund: losing weight / surviving a tough childhood / etc...

present perfect: (that) I've lost weight / (that) I've...

past simple: I was accepted as a student at ... / I was accepted as...

Could you please answer the following questions?

1. Does the last example imply that the person's days at university are over? I'd say so.

2. Would you write "I survived a tough childhood" or "I've survived a tough childhood"? I'd go for the former. (To me "I survived a tough childhood" is just a fact about the past (i.e. I survived and it's over) whereas "I've survived a tough childhood", if correct, means "Look, I'm here and I'm alive" to me in the context of this questionnaire)

3. Would "I lost weight" sound odd? I'd say so - to me, it implies that the person has put on weight again. Therefore, losing weight couldn't be considered an achievement here.
(note on 2 and 3: if you lose weight, you can put it on again BUT when you survive your childhood, you can't "unsurvive" it - i.e. die in your childhood)

4. What about "being accepted as a student at..."? Sounds completely OK to me.

5. If you were still studying at that university, would you always use the present perfect version - "I've been accepted"? Would the past simple be possible at all here in this case? To be honest, it doesn't sound that bad to me.

6. What would be your general guidelines as to when to use the gerund / past simple / present perfect in the answer? I'd say:
a. gerund - universal
b. past perfect - in achievements like losing weight , i.e. the achievement may not be permament, it's still valid
c. past simple - all except b.

I'm not sure how the "accepted as a student" example would fit in, though.

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I've just reread my post. How come the "be" precedes the subject in my question (#6)? I'm quite sure it's OK that way.

By the way, I've heard people say:

"What would/will be the result if.... ?" and "What would/will the result be if...?"

It's indeed a strange thing this position of "be" in questions with the future simple / present perfect simple / conditional....

gerund: losing weight could be a great achievement for someone weighing a quarter of a tone!

present perfect: I've lost a little weight lately. This implies he is not as heavy as before. Perfect tense is fine.

past simple: I was accepted as a student at UCLA before I graduated high school. âok to me.

Could you please answer the following questions?

1. Does the last example imply that the person's days at university are over? I'd say so.

I disagree. Consider this: what if the person was making this statement while he is in his second year of college? To determine the right answer to your question, it would have to depend on the full context.

2. Would you write "I survived a tough childhood" or "I've survived a tough childhood"?

I survived / suffered a tough childhood. This implied you are now an adult. Childhood is over. Unless you have additional events tied to your childhood. i.e. I had survived / suffered a tough childhood between my parentsâ devoice and remarriage.

3. Would "I lost weight" sound odd? I'd say so - to me, it implies that the person has put on weight again. Not necessarily true. Consider this: Mary started a dietary and exercise program 3 months ago. Yesterday, she weighed and found herself 25 pounds lighter. She could say â I lost weigh!â. Thatâs why we canât determine the right answer with a one-liner.

4. What about "being accepted as a student at..."? Sounds completely OK to me.

Ok to me tooâ¦

5. If you were still studying at that university, would you always use the present perfect version - "I've been accepted"? Would the past simple be possible at all here in this case? To be honest, it doesn't sound that bad to me. " src="/emoticons/emotion-5.gif">

If you are still in high school and you are telling your friend that you have been accepted by UCLA, itâs perfectly fine. In fact, past simple wonât work well in this case.

6. What would be your general guidelines as to when to use the gerund / past simple / present perfect in the answer? I'd say:
a. gerund - universal
b. past perfect - in achievements like losing weight , i.e. the achievement may not be permament, it's still valid
c. past simple - all except b.

Itâs not a simple answer. You have to put the gerund or questions about the tense in context with the sentence. Itâs not possible to give you a guideline. Itâs too vague.

Re: PRIEST

Mister Micawber — Sun, 26 Feb 2006 10:04:42 GMT

I wouldn't know, M56-- I'm an atheist.

In Christianity

In the Christian context, some confusion is caused for English speakers by two different Greek words traditionally translated as priest. Both occur in the New Testament, which draws a distinction not always observed in English. The first, presbyteros (ÏÏÎµÏÎ²ÏÏÎµÏÎ¿Ï), Latin presbyter, is traditionally translated priest and the English word priest is indeed etymologically derived from this word; literally, it means elder, and is used in neutral and non-religious contexts in Greek to refer to seniority or relative age. The second, hiereus ('Î¹ÎµÏÎµÏÏ), Latin sacerdos, refers to priests who offer sacrifice, such as the priesthood of the Jewish Temple, or the priests of pagan gods. The New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews draws a distinction between the Jewish priesthood and that of Christ; it teaches that the sacrificial atonement made by Jesus Christ has made the Jewish priesthood redundant. Thus, for Christians, Christ himself is uniquely hiereus. Catholic and Orthodox Christians, however, believe that presbyters (and bishops) share in the one priesthood of Christ and are therefore empowered to offer the one sacrifice of Jesus in the form of the Eucharist which, though Hebrews says is offered "once for all" is (because God is outside of time) the very sacrifice of the Cross. Through the offering of the Eucharist, the priest who presides and the congregation which is present are enabled to participate in Christ's redemptive work of the Cross, both for themselves and on behalf of all for whom they pray. At some point after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (A.D. 70), possibly as early as A.D. 90 (see The Didache), Greek-speaking Christians began using hiereus to refer, first, to bishops and then, by extension, to the presbyters under them, but still making a distinction between the Jewish priesthood, pagan priesthoods, and the priesthood of Christ. Thus, in Eastern Orthodoxy, Oriental Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Anglicanism, the terms "presbyter" and "priest" are virtually interchangeable (although, technically, bishops are also priests in this sense, and are sometimes called "high priests"). Priests, like deacons, are clergymembers and can only be ordained by a bishop. In the case of the ordination of a bishop, three or more bishops are normally required to perform the consecration.

Catholic and Orthodox

Roman Catholic priest LCDR Allen R. Kuss (USN) aboard USS Enterprise

The most significant liturgical acts reserved to Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, and Roman Catholic priests are the administration of the Sacraments, including the celebration of the Mass or Divine Liturgy as well as the Eucharist, and the Sacrament of Reconciliation, a rite of Repentance, also called Confession. Holy Baptism is also normally administered by a priest, as is, in the Eastern Rites, chrismation, which corresponds to confirmation in the West. Additionally, priests in both East and West administer the other sacramental mysteries, including the anointing of the sick and marriage. The only sacrament which is always reserved to a bishop is that of ordination. The presence and ministry of a priest is required for a parish to function fully. This activity is known in Roman Catholicism as the cure of souls.

In these traditions, only men who meet certain requirements may become priests. In Catholicism the canonical minimum age is twenty-five. Bishops may dispense with this rule and ordain men up to one year younger; dispensations of more than a year are reserved to the Holy See (Can. 1031 Â§Â§1, 4.) A Catholic priest must be incardinated by his bishop or his major religious superior in order to engage in public ministry. In Orthodoxy the normal minimum age is thirty (Can. 9 of Neocaesarea) but a bishop may dispense with this at need. In neither tradition may priests marry after ordination. In the Latin rite of the Roman church, they must be celibate and there are special rules for married clergy converting from certain other Christian confessions. Married men may become priests in Eastern Orthodoxy and the Eastern Rites of the Roman church but in neither case may they marry after ordination even if they become widowed. It is also important to note that canditates for the episcopacy are only chosen from among the celibate.

Some Catholic churches, not in communion with the Roman Church, do ordain women as well as men as priests; such churches include some Old Catholic communities, as well as some Independent Catholic Churches. These churches also generally permit the ordination of married people.

Protestant

Most Protestant denominations do not use the term "priest" to describe the individual who has an officiating role because of its association with the idea of the Eucharist as sacrifice. In these denominations leaders of congregations are instead typically called "ministers" or "pastors" and are not necessarily believed to possess any special sacramental charism by virtue of their office. Lutheranism uses "priest" in Scandinavia and the Baltics and in churches deriving from there, but not in Germany and churches deriving from there.

Anglican Communion

The churches of the Anglican Communion universally refer to three orders of ordained ministry: bishops, priests and deacons. Priestly celibacy was abolished during the Reformation, although Anglican priests in religious orders normally are celibate. In a growing number of provinces of the Communion both men and women can be ordained priests. Anglican priests, whether serving as vicar, rector, curate or parson, in general function in ways which are similar to the priests of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

Quaker

Quakerism does not grant a special priestly role to any individual, partly because Quakers do not practice any special sacraments that require priestly mediation, and partly because they believe that the priesthood of all believers grants the potential of a spiritual and ministerial role to all individuals within the denomination, regardless of sex or status within the faith.

Re: grammar

Hela — Sat, 14 Jan 2006 01:51:13 GMT

Dear friends,

Concerning subject-verb concord this is what I found in grammar book:

"1. In English the verb usually agrees with the subject even if the verb is separated from its subject by prepositional phrases, relative clauses, brackets or commas:
eg: The petrol station across the road from the new shops has just cut its prices.

2. However, if the verb is a long way from the subject but is closer to a complement, it is possible to agree the verb with the complement:
eg: The most exciting event was the rowing finals.
The most exciting event in the Sydney Olympics for most British viewers was / were the rowing finals.

3. The same can apply after what used to introduce a relative:
eg: What the Board needs to address now is / are the terms of the redundancies."

But is doesn't say what should one do if 2 or 3 constituents of a same subject are separated by a relative clause, such as in:

"With him were / was (both possible?) his American wife Fanny, whom he had met five years earlier in France, and his stepchildren from Frannyâs first marriage."

What is your view (or should I say "What are your views" since you're many ) about it?

Kind regards,
Hela