Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Countable nouns' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Countable nouns'

using photoalbums from the net-ideas for teachers

linguaprof — Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:24:40 GMT

My tips:
Look at the photoalbum: http://picasaweb.google.com/Sean.Pigg/MimsAndSeanSHouse
With an elementary/pre-intermediate student these pictures could be used to teach:
1. The vocabulary of house and living.
2. Present simple by asking: What do they usually do in this room/ place? (interrogative, negative too)
3. Present continuous, by using the pictures with people, asking What are they doing?, etc.(interrogative, negative too)
4. The use of There is, There are. (interrogative, negative too)
5. Countable, uncountable nouns- much and many- Many chairs, much space
6. Prepositions of place.
7. Comparatives and superlatives- This room is bigger than that one. This is the largest room., etc.

These are just a few ideas. Have fun!
Peter

Re: Problem with There's, there aren't + some/any

Hector9 — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:05:34 GMT

Thank you for your answer.

So, If I want to say that are chairs in here, What must I use?

There are chairs in here. (I think this is wrong)

There are some chairs in here. (I think this is the great sentence)

With gold:

There's some gold in that mine. (I think this is the great sentence)

There's gold in that mine (I think this is wrong)

Am I OK? In accord what you said, I think I'm ok now, but I really don't know.

In other words, with uncountable nouns, Must I use them with 'some and 'any' in negative and positive sentences?

For example:

I have some new information for you or I have new information for you?

There's not any water at the kitchen or There's not water at the kitchen?

Thanks a lot

I Have some doubts, help me please

Hector9 — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 21:48:14 GMT

I donÂ´t understand the use and the meaning of these casses, iÂ´ll put the explanation of my english book

The use of Some/Any (Yes, very difficult)

Some is used in positive sentences with plurals and uncountable nouns
Examples:
I have some friends
Do you want some food?

Any is used in negative sentences and questions with plurals and uncountable nouns.
Examples:
I donÂ´t have any friends
Do you have any coffee?

I donÂ´t understand nothing about this.

The use of Take

The verb take has lots of meanings. Here are some examples:
Take me to the airport, please.
Take this ticket!
Can i take a message?

I donÂ´t understand the use of Something/Anything and Someone/Anyone, either.

Sorry guys A lot of people explained me these uses, but i donÂ´t understand Perhaps you can explain me

Thank you very much for your time

Re: there is not/ there is no

Lcchang — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:50:27 GMT

CalifJim wrote:
difference is a countable noun. Countable nouns in the singular require a determiner. no is a determiner. not is not a determiner. not negates the verb.

So you can have the positive statement There is with the determiner no and noun the difference.
Or you can have the negative statement There is not with the determiner any and noun difference.

But you can't have the negative There is not and then add difference without a determiner.

CJ

Thank you CJ. I love your answer the best. Thanks to others too.

LCChang

Re: there is not/ there is no

CalifJim — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 21:10:19 GMT

difference is a countable noun. Countable nouns in the singular require a determiner. no is a determiner. not is not a determiner. not negates the verb.

So you can have the positive statement There is with the determiner no and noun the difference.
Or you can have the negative statement There is not with the determiner any and noun difference.

But you can't have the negative There is not and then add difference without a determiner.

CJ

Re: ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½

Clive — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 06:17:33 GMT

Hi,

Please look the sentence "This is NO easy task". What part of speech is "NO" in the sentence? My English-Japanese dictionaries say this NO is an Adjective because it modifies and negates the phrase "easy task". But I understand that "task" is a Countable Noun and if I am right, I think we maybe need to put some determiner before "no (Adj) + easy (Adj) + task (countable N)". So I think this "NO" is rather a kind of negative article (or determiner) that is equivalent to the German "KEIN". Am I right?

I can't compare to the German language. However, I would agree that 'no' is a determiner here.

We also say things like

Tom is no honest man.

No excuse(s) will be accepted.

No man is an island.

No bus stops on Main Street.

Best wishes, Clive

ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½

Anonymous — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 05:38:17 GMT

Hello

I'm an English learner from Japan and I have a question.

Please look the sentence "This is NO easy task". What part of speech is "NO" in the sentence? My English-Japanese dictionaries say this NO is an Adjective because it modifies and negates the phrase "easy task". But I understand that "task" is a Countable Noun and if I am right, I think we maybe need to put some determiner before "no (Adj) + easy (Adj) + task (countable N)". So I think this "NO" is rather a kind of negative article (or determiner) that is equivalent to the German "KEIN". Am I right?

Thank you in advance

any in summary

New2grammar — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 17:52:45 GMT

I have gone through a lot of the old posts on the topic any. This is my understanding of any usage.

Any can be followed by a plural/uncountable/singular noun.

1. When any is used in interogative or negative form, it is usually followed by a plural/uncountable noun. Does it mean that the verb always agrees with the plural/uncountable noun if the noun is also a subject?

For example,

Do you have any kids that are older than 9 years old?

There aren't any good options.

Exceptional case.

He is amazed that there isn't any sales tax in MN.

There isn't any widely used password checker out there which has the ...

2. When it is used in declarative form, it is usually followed by a singular noun.

Any idea is a good idea => the verb agrees with the singular noun idea.

Exceptional case.

If you have any comments, please e-mail them to me. => the pronoun agrees with the plural noun comment

Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks

a little and little revisited

Believer — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 20:35:37 GMT

Hi,

Please check if my reasoning is correct.

a little and little are ususally used in front of uncountable nouns to signal the amount in possession and they respectively are coming from the positive polarity and negative polarity view points.

I have a little or little money -- Here, it is acting as a sort of quantifier, I think.

1. OK, but I think, this take on looking from the positive polarity view point and negative polarity view point fails somewhat when they are used as adverbs like this.

I speak English a little.

I think you can say, "I speak English little," but is awakward and sounds stilted??.

2. And that "polarity view point" thing?? also isn't applicable when they are used to modify adjectives, I think.

I am a little angry.

I think you cannot say "I am little angry."

3. And I think you can't use for this too.

He has been Treasurer for a little over four years.

Here, I think, you cannot say, "He has been Treasrer for little over four years."

Re: Change English As You Wish

Cool Breeze — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 13:20:32 GMT

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 everybody automatically speaks and writes the new English fluently without having to learn anything.

In the colonial days several European languages got exported as taking peoples' lands from them was considered a virtue and something to be proud of. This resulted in some languages being more dominant than others. Spanish and French were the most important languages till the end of the 19th century when the USA rose to be No. 1 in world politics and commerce. The foundation for English as the lingua franca had been laid.

The world should be thankful. There is no such thing as an easy language; every language is difficult if the learner aims at perfection. However, there are grammatically and structurally far more complicated languages than English, and we should consider ourselves lucky it's only the spelling that drives us nuts about English, not inflections.

Here are the changes I would make to English:

A. Spelling: Grammar Geek, Alienvoord and Englishuser would all make changes to the spelling, and indeed so would I. I think Englishuser puts it nicely: "I'd certainly change the spelling of words with an 'irregular' spelling, that is, words whose pronunciation can't be determined basing on how they're spelt." I would also accept more than one spelling for a word in many cases.

There isn't enough space and I don't have enough time and patience to cover all the tens of thousands of words this entails, but here are some examples of new spellings:

OLD                                 NEW
fight                                  fite
perceive                           perceive, percieve
tough                                 tuf
though                              tho
knight                                 nite
caste                                 cast
pace                                 pace, pase
write                                 rite

B. Grammar: English grammar is so uncomplicated due to 500 years of simplifying foreign influence (200 years of Vikings and 300 years of Normans) that English grammar really couldn't be made much simpler even if it were an artificial language. However, as a foreigner I'll continue the foreign influence and enforce the following changes.

1. I will get rid of the third person singular s and has. Henceforth we will say: He speak English. He have a car. He have asked it twice. The s is a totally needless relic and Swedish, another Germanic language, needs no verb endings for any person even though it is more complicated than English in other respects.

2. There will be no irregular verbs from now on with the exception of to be and the defective or modal auxiliaries, which will remain unchanged. Examples of new English:

OLD                                 NEW
He saw us.                        He seed us.
He has written a letter.    He have rited a letter.
Who wrote it?                   Who/Hu rited it?
I haven't hit him.               I haven't hitted him.
I ran too fast.                    I runned too fast.

3. I'll return English to its pre-Shakespearean state with regard to questions and negations. Henceforth, English will be like the other Germanic languages and questions will be asked without the totally unnecessary do auxiliary:

OLD                                  NEW
Do you speak English? Speak you English?
I didn't see him.                  I seed not him.
Did you do it?                   Doed you it?

4. All past participles can be used attributively before nouns: a rited report, a catched fish, two asked questions, a surrendered country.

5. There will be no irregular plurals for nouns:

OLD                                     NEW
two men                               two mans
many children                      many childs
these phenomena              these phenomenons
two geese                           two gooses

6. Any uncountable noun can be used as a countable if the need arises:

OLD                                    NEW
two pieces of advice         two advices
two news items                  two newses

7. I'll leave the articles, pronouns, numerals, adjectives and adverbs as they are. There are countless idioms where the articles are used contrary to reason and logic, but non-natives' incorrect usage seldom gives rise to misunderstandings. Besides, who am I to deprive English of all its fascination?
Those who don't like sentences like He runned too fast have my permission to say He runned too fastly if they prefer that.

8. Since there are so few inflections, the word order will just have to remain as it it with a few exceptions. For the sake of clarity, some minor changes will take effect: You Only Live Twice has to be renamed (and rerecorded) You Live Only Twice. (Fortunately Nancy Sinatra is still alive, she can rerecord it next week!)

9. Some changes in clause equivalents would make English more exact, but I am reluctant to make them. I'll let English remain somewhat inexact. It is plain impossible to make it exact in every respect without more inflections, and more inflections would make learning English a more laborious task for non-natives.

Consider these examples:

Having said that, he left the room. (After he had said that, he left the room.)
"Having said that, he did win Wimbledon two years ago." (A tennis commentator has said something slightly negative about a player, then decides to mention a positive thing about him. The sentence does not usually mean: After he had said that, he won Wimbledon two years ago. But of course it could mean that, too.)

English abounds in ambiguity and native speakers disagree on what common verbs such as the defective auxiliaries mean in some contexts. I'll let all that be as it is, I know when to give up.

Vocabulary: I'll add some short words that can be used to indicate surprise, disbelief etc. in spoken English in sentences like: He goed there? You like not it! Haven't you seed it? I won't write the words here, though, I just think English could and should have more finesse and be more expressive and colorful.

I won't delete a single word from the vocabulary, on the contrary, I'll add a way of forming a word denoting a person from a town or a village. English already has many such words but on the whole they are rather impractical: a Liverpudlian, a Memphian. Some are easier: a Londoner, a New Yorker. But what do you call a person who lives in Timbuktu?

From now on, the ending will always be er: a Liverpooler, a Memphiser, an Uppsalaer, a Hong Konger, a Tokyoer, a Timbuktuer. This will add hundreds of thousands of words to English. I'll also let you call a Swede a Swedener and a Thai a Thailander if you wish.

I have simplified the grammar a little and that should help non-native learners in particular. I have left the basic structure of the language untouched except for the disappearance of do in questions and negations. But even this is actually a minor thing since it just returns English to the early 16th century.

I have increased the vocabulary a great deal. Every three-year-old Finn knows what to call a person from Timbuktu once he is told there is such a place. English-speaking kids should be able to do the same.

Cheers
CB

Search results for 'tag:Negatives tag:Countable nouns' matching tags 'Negatives' and 'Countable nouns'

using photoalbums from the net-ideas for teachers

Re: Problem with There's, there aren't + some/any

I Have some doubts, help me please

Re: there is not/ there is no

Re: there is not/ there is no

Re: ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½

ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½

any in summary

a little and little revisited

Re: Change English As You Wish

Re: ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½

ï¼´ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ãï¼®ï¼¯ãï½ï½ï½ï½ãï½ï½ï½ï½