Hi everybody, I strongly disagree with the views mentioned on behalf of the Callan Method. Just because it promises to get the student where he or she wants to, doesn't mean the Method deserves criticism. I've been teaching English both

Just to let you know buddy, every language has to have some future tense. It would be rediculous if you weren't able to express what you will, or are going to do because your language has no existing way of expressing the future. I would love

Considering that Phuang only started learning English a year ago,.. a)it was an intensive course in a local language school b)She could easily do her doctorate in the US. c)she is able to write good composition in it d)she should be fairly fluent

Hi, Considering that Phuang only started learning English a year ago,.. a)it was an intensive course in a local language school No. The second part of the sentence needs to be about some achievement by Phuang. b)She could easily do her doctorate

Considering that Phuang only started learning English a year ago,.. a)it was an intensive course in a local language school b)She could easily do her doctorate in the US. c)she is able to write good composition in it d)she should be fairly fluent

"The mystery is that this should come as a surprise to any boss. Surely it should be obvious to the dimmest executive that trust, that most valuable of economic assets, is easily destroyed and hugely expensive to restore – and that few things

This is exactly the point I was trying to make about the limitation of the rules. They're useful only in eliminating the adjectival function, not in asserting it. An adverbial / prepositional phrase, according to the two rules, may be placed

I see no problem in using them interchangeably in your original example. Conventions are often developed within a community of experts such as nuclear biologists, etc. They may bend what the academic grammarians would recommend, but I don't

Hi guys Why in this question we do not use "did": Who brought you up? (instead of: Who did bring you up?) And in this one we do: Who did you look up to? (instead of: Who you looked up to?) Hi, It has to do with the role of " who

Hi, Could you try to convince me why the abrupt change of tense makes sense? Why should it make sense? After all, we're talking about English grammar! Anyway, somebody says it's an instance of unreal past ... We sometimes use past tenses