Can someone check out these answers for me? Thanks. 2 . For the following sentence, choose the edited version that improves sentence variety and is free of errors. (B) These videos are aimed at *** girls. The videos face virtually no

What about a completely different tense that isn't accounted for in any of the conditionals? Is such a construction only permissible in informal situations: If learners will be reading this, I should fix the errors. I don't see any

Thank you, guys. When first reading about the conditionals, I thought it was clear and simple, but I now realise semantics and the subjectivity of the likelihood has a bearing on which conditional to use (between conditionals 1 and 2,

Hello, I have been working on my assignment, and these questions have been troubling me. I was wondering, if anyone could just have a look at my answers and rational, to let me know where my mistakes lie. Thanks for the help. *My answers will be

There is a class of verbs in English known as "stative" verbs because they relate to a state of being rather than an action (as in a dynamic verb); believe, hate, love for example are stative verbs. These are never used in the continuous

Don Aitken typed thus: I was taught that "Yours faithfully" follows "Dear Sir" or ... I encountered anyone else who had even heard of it. Yippee! Laura has heard of it, so that *proves* I didn't imagine it. I was beginning

} Of course. But if some did, then there would be examples. The } lack of examples strongly suggests that ... who think that the lack of examples that they are aware of suggests in any definitive way that none exist. There are two things being

Hi Dipsik Either one is OK. If you place "only" directly in front of "an infinitesimal chance", then you would be focusing the idea of "only" directly on "an infinitesimal chance".

}> } "The king his crown" is a well-known example of such a construction } that only appeared in writing ... stuff for some ten years now (and my son before me), and I don't think that he has defended that. Of course not. I'd

someone suggusted that 1: when the word "content " refers to the all the contents, it should be uncountable . 2: when the word "content" refers to part of all the contents, then it should be countable . eg