Search results for 'tag:Prepositions tag:English grammar' matching tags 'Prepositions' and 'English grammar'

Re: passive voice

Goodman — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 22:54:10 GMT

Huevos,

So am I correct to assume that your classification of âexhaustedâ is adjectival in nature? Perhaps, this is the difference between how you and I see it. For pure fact finding interest, I have done some more investigative research: Bear in mind, my sentence was âI am completely exhausted from â¦â

Your answer was âItâs activeâ.

http://www.perfectyourenglish.com/grammar/passives-agents.htm

English Grammar

Passives: Agents

In most cases, the subject of an active verb (the agent) is not mentioned in the corresponding passive sentence. If it does have to be mentioned, we usually use an expression with by.

They gave me a warm welcome. (active)
I was given a warm welcome by them. (passive)
Children love toys. (active)
Toys are loved by children. (passive)
They built this house. (active)
This house was built by them.
Her attitude shocked me.
I was shocked by her attitude.

It should be noted that by is not the only word with which the agent can be introduced. After the past participles of some 'stativeâ verbs (verbs which refer to states, not actions) other prepositions can be used instead of by.

The state of his health worries me. (active)
I am worried about the state of his health. (passive)
Snakes scare me. (active)
I am scared of snakes. (passive)

With is used when we talk about an instrument which is used by an agent to do an action.

He killed the snake with a stick. (active)
The snake was killed (by him) with a stick. (passive)

__
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003AprJun/0312.html

Passive voice is a verb where the action is done to the subject of the
clause, often by something. (The verb "done" there is the first verb in the
passive voice in this email). The pattern is that there is a subject, a
verb,
perhaps an agent (the thing that "does" the verb to the subject, and
possible
other stuff too.

Something that seems to confuse people is the pattern of the subject, the
verb to be (is, are, will be, was, etc) and an adjective or participle - a
description of the subject.

For example, "I am confused" is technically in the passive voice. However it
is a description of me like "I am tall" which is definitely not in the
passive voice. The confusion comes about because english uses a similar
pattern to make passive voice.

I suggest that we do not discourage this simple form, whether it is a
passive
construction or a simple description.

"I am confused by the passive voice" is the third time I have used the
<<<passive voice>>> in this email. It has the pattern subject - "me", a
verb - "confuse", and an agent - "the passive voice" - the thing which did
the confusing.

For most verbs in english (and many modern european languages) the passive
voice is made by combining the past participle (often "something-ed") with
the verb to be. (That was the fourth example: subject is the passive voice,
verb is to make, agent is the whole description of how to make it). For
example, The example I have used here is the verb "to confuse" - the passive
of "to confuse" is "to be confused".

Continues..on website.

Hope this resolved the difference of interpretations.

Re: in at last vs. at least in

Cool Breeze — Sun, 28 Sep 2008 07:27:38 GMT

Huevos
OK, but is there an argument that demonstrates "in" is somehow connected to "ways".

Your comments help me understand why some native speakers consider English grammar difficult. What else could in be connected to in the original sentence? In is used with way[s ]. In informal style the preposition is sometimes left out:

It can be done in a number of ways.

It can't be done in any other way. (But: It can't be done on any other day.)

"I did it [in] my way."

It is wrong to say: It can be done on a number of ways. It can be done after a number of ways. It can be done to a number of ways, etc.

If a preposition is required by a verb, changing the verb changes the preposition as well - unless, of course, the new verb requires the same preposition. Other changes have no effect on the preposition. Examples:

It can be laughed at. The problem can't be laughed at. His success was laughed at.

It can be thought of/about. The problem can be thought of/about.

It can be looked into. The problem can be looked into.

Approach doesn't require in:

It can be approached in. (Wrong, at least in Helsinki English!)

Re: You and I vs. You and me

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 10:34:36 GMT

I would not profess to be an expert in English grammar but "people whose minds are not oriented for correct English" sounds not only pompous but incorrect ! Â The verb "orient" is more commonly used with the prepositions "to" or "towards". Â Maybe it would be better to say "people whose main focus is not English grammar".

Re: it's probably wrong, but ...

Seraphin — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:08:57 GMT

Thanks, A

rooms/a room is simply a typo.

I had some lessons on English grammar in the past (LONG past), but now I barely remember any specifics.

What I remember is (sorry for not able to be more clear)

"you don't put a preposition in front of "there" and "here" (don't know the proper terminology in this context)"

You say "we'll talk THERE", NOT "we'll talk IN there".

Are these two "there's" different, grammatically?

'For example, although it is true to say that the noun group is the structure we choose for "the things" we want to talk about, it is not the only one.'

Peaceblinkfriend — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:35:18 GMT

For example, although it is true to say that the noun group is the structure we choose for the things we want to talk about, it is not the only one. Sometimes we want to talk about an event or an idea that is not easy to express in a noun group. Instead we can use a clause as the subject of another clause. e.g All I want is a holiday. (Quoted from the introduction of Collins COBUILD English Grammar )

I don't quite understand what it means by 'the things we want to talk about'. What is being referred to by 'the things'? For all it's worth, according to the glossary included in the grammar, a noun group is a group of words which acts as the subject, complement, or object of a clause, or as the object of a preposition. Also called nominal group or noun phrase.

Thank you

PBF

CASE?

Anonymous — Fri, 23 May 2008 01:55:05 GMT

Hi,

In the book named "Longman English Grammar" by L. G. Alexander in the section 8 named "Prepositions, Adverb particles, and Phrasal verbs," I saw this sentence. What does 'case' mean to you?

English uses more prepositions than most other European languages, partly because 'case' [>1.1] is no longer expressed by noun endings.

Also, what does 'adverb particle' mean?

Re: Differences between English and your native language

Kooyeen — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:38:51 GMT

Hi CB,
I wouldn't know where to start! English grammar is pretty different from Italian grammar. However, there are a lot of similar words (one example: government - governo), and several similar structures and idioms. The problem is that there are also several false friends, and lots of features that are very confusing because they wouldn't make sense in Italian.

One example is prepositions: on the net, on a pc, in a movie, in a dictionary, in a newspaper... in Italian you could use either "in" or "on" (nel, nella, etc / sul, sulla, etc.), and no one would notice (I hope so, lol). I always have to be careful to use the right prepositions in English, in Italian I pick one at random, lol.

Then there are tricky words like "any" and "some", which in Italian are both "del, delle, etc.", so you don't have to choose. The same is true of "few" and "little" (=un po'), and for "already" and "yet" (=giÃ )... and many other things I don't remember right now.

And there are a lot more tricky things, like negative questions (we use negative questions to sound "casual" and "polite", but in English they sound completely different), genderless pronouns (in Italian it's so simple, it just depends whether the noun is masculine or feminine, so death is a "she", and hate is a "he"), etc.

Anyway, don't think Italian is simple... it's really a mess. And there are a lot of regional differences, REALLY a lot. Just think that I hardly ever speak Italian, so I wouldn't say my Italian is very good at all.

Re: in a ring

bernice.farrugia — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:21:35 GMT

You say that they are performing IN a ring.

They are surrounded by the ring, therefore they are IN it.

Kindly tell me which is correct usage(British grammar)!!

Creativeguru — Sun, 10 Feb 2008 07:25:01 GMT

I was reading newspaper, i came across all the following sentence which grabbed my attention, I think they are wrong grammatically and in some cases preposition is not correct. Kindly help me, in the brackets I had written my style of written or as per my understanding of english grammar.

1. Taj holidays early bird offer or Taj holidayâs early bird offer
2. Luxurious times lie(or lies) ahead for your near and dear ones.
3. No one wants to let go of (or off) an opportunity to be a known face in the milling crowd. (is 'milling' ia a appropriate word to use here and what does it means)
4. Does your inner voice talk(or talks) to you?
5. But, once again I chose not to give in(or give up, please yell me when to use give in and give up)
6. Now, with BSNL you can not only connect your near and dear ones but also get(or gets) the benefits of personal accident insurance.
7. Perfect valentine (or valentine's) gift for your beloved.
8. Chances are that you will end up on(or with) the rear bumper of the car in front.
9. Marg focusing its visioneerings on ports and logistics, industrial clutters, commercial infrastructure( or infrastructures as others have's') and homes. 

Re: He insisted on my/me singing a song.

Cool Breeze — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:31:40 GMT

Grammar Geek wrote:
Singing is a gerund, a noun, so it takes the possessive my.

This is rather peculiar, I think. I have encountered the same thing on these forums many times. Native speakers say: "A gerund is a noun." Do they teach it that way in American schools and universities? Grammatical terminology varies greatly from country to country but I have yet to meet a grammarian who says a noun can have an object:

I insisted on his speaking English.

Furthermore, all nouns can have an adjectival attribute; in other words, we can put an adjective before them:

He likes old books.
Merry old England fascinates me.
Little Mary wanted to go out.
Useful information was given to everybody.

So, if gerunds are full-fledged nouns, the following is correct:

Correct speaking English is easy.

Few consider it correct. A gerund is neither a noun nor a verb; it's a cross between them. It has some qualities characteristic of nouns and some that are characteristic of verbs. It resembles a verb in that it can take an object, for instance.

Therefore, "I insist on him speaking English" and "I insist on his speaking English" are equally grammatical. In the first sentence, him is used due to the influence of the preposition on, which is normal English grammar. In the second sentence his is used because speaking is a noun to an extent, even though it's not a complete noun. It has long been customary to consider possessive forms (my, his, our) of personal pronouns better than the object forms (me, him, us) as subjects of a gerund. It also used to be common to consider the basic or common form of other words better in this position:

I insist on John Smith speaking English. (Also: John Smith's)
I insist on everybody speaking English. (Rarely: everybody's)

In the past 30 or so years I have noticed a tendency in American magazines and newspapers to prefer the genitive even in cases where it sounds and looks ludicrous. I assume this can be ascribed to rising standards in education. Nevertheless, there has never been a grammatical justification to consider one of the alternatives better. The tendency to consider the possessive form the better seems to me to stem from grammatical ignorance rather than a good knowledge of it. There is no grammatical or historical justification for preferring either form.

Cheers
CB