Search results for 'tag:Invitations tag:Prepositions' matching tags 'Invitations' and 'Prepositions'

Re: TOEIC question

CalifJim — Wed, 20 Sep 2006 07:34:13 GMT

The idiom is to have [amount of time] to (do something).
It means that the action described by the final infinitive must be done within the amount of time allotted.

The students had one hour to complete the exam.
We have three months to install the kitchen cabinets.
Martha and Sam have only three days to prepare for the party.

Focus on just the amount of time. The amount of time can be expressed in several additional ways with the help of prepositions like since, until, from, and to. These prepositions are used to show the temporal boundaries of amounts of time, so the amount of time is shown indirectly by mentioning the beginning and/or ending of the time period. (If only one of the two boundaries is mentioned, the other boundary normally defaults to now.)

The students have had since last Thursday to finish the homework. (The amount of time is from last Thursday until now.)
We have until March 17 to make a decision. (The amount of time is from now until March 17.)
Martha and Sam have from Wednesday to the end of the week to buy the ingredients. (The amount of time is from Wednesday to the end of the week.)

The words before and after are used differently. They specify when in time, usually with respect to a point in time as marked by some event. In this way they are similar to expressions like at 6 o'clock. They don't specify how much time either directly (as in one hour) or indirectly through time boundaries (as in until tomorrow).

after the concert says when (with respect to the time of the concert), not how much time.
before sunset says when (with respect to the time of sunset), not how much time.

Consider what is wrong here:

*We have at 6 o'clock to finish the job. (at 6 o'clock is not an amount of time.)
*We have after Tuesday to decide on a plan. (after Tuesday is not an amount of time.)

It is possible, although less usual, to combine the two sets of prepositions.

The men have had since before the end of last week to pave the road.
Sam and Yolanda have until after the 15th to send the invitations.
We will probably have until just before 7:15 to get to the box office and pick up the tickets.
Jack has from slightly after 8 until five minutes before 9 to clean the bedrooms.

I hope this helps.
CJ

Re: Who vs. whom

CalifJim — Mon, 07 Aug 2006 23:56:16 GMT

Not when the preposition is followed directly by "who", no!

(When I said 99.99999%, I was referring only to the choice between "who" and "whom" in the example sentence about an invitation.)

CJ

Re: whomever/whoever

Kilimanjaro — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:34:23 GMT

Mister Micawber wrote:

Whoever, as the subject of the verb may come, takes grammatical priority. The whole clause is the object of the preposition, to.

Does a little bit of alteration change the choice Micawber? as in :

I'll send these invitation cards to whomever/whoever the party was arranged for. (in this case both relative pronouns seem to be in object position)

Re: who(m)

MrPedantic — Sat, 13 May 2006 00:41:18 GMT

You use "whom" for the object of a verb or preposition, and "who" for the subject of the verb, e.g.

1. Who's coming to the party? [who = subject of "is"]

2. Whom did you invite to the party? [whom = object of "invite"]

3. There were several grammarians at the party, none of whom had an invitation. [whom = object of "of"]

You'll often hear "who" for "whom", when it's used as the object of a verb (as in #2); less often, when it's the object of a preposition (as in #3), unless the preposition is separated from the pronoun, e.g.

4. Who did you give it to?

MrP