Do teachers here reply to a "Thank you" note? From all of us, You're welcome, Pastel. (L)

tongue stays in the same place as where they pronouced /r/ and you get the 'sh' noise. Nice call, Eq. Alveo-palatals! (On seeing SH/ZH, I assumed palatal-fricatives. . .) Nice example of regressive and progressive assimilation, though:

You're welcome, Hela. (L) 1) and 3) are my choices. 3) is a structural analysis of 1). 1) look = verb; at me = adverb; 3) "at" preposition, "me" object of the preposition "at". She looked at me . (rephrased: She looked in my direction

Mr P: In the sentence 'Whom was given the book?', I find mild panic sets in at 'given': that's when you know something isn't as it should be. It doesn't seem to be a matter of semantics, though, does it? Max was given the book.

Mr P: If 'whom' is acceptable in #2 for 'to whom', is 'whom' acceptable in #1 for 'to whom'? If so, is #1 acceptable as an inversion As an inverted, incorporated indirect object, it sounds odd (to me): Indirect Object Replacement: You

"everyday", one word, is an adjective. It modifies a noun. "every day", two words, is an adverb. It modifies a verb. If you can add the word "single", you know you need two words: I wash the dishes every (single) day . (Adverb) I wash the

Simon, it could have something to do with the word's origin, its original function and meaning. Consider, I feel aweful. It feels aweful. ( > Old Norse) I feel *painful. It feels painful. ( > Latin) Cf. I feel pain. It feels pain.

Both "a" and "the" work: a weekend (an odd weekend, here and there) the weekend (every weekend) What about? Sometimes, I spend the weekend in the suburbs, where there are nice hotels, parks, restaurants, swimming pools, cinemas, golf

You're welcome, Paco. As a noun, "both" is 'definite', or defining in meaning: Defining Noun + of + the + Noun Both of the baskets of strawberries. Non-Defining Adjective + of + ( the ) + Noun Both (the) baskets of strawberries.

Additionally, here's a source that might help: Theodore Bernstein author of Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage (Gramercy Books: New York. 1999. p. 217) lists three conditions in which we should maintain the conjunction that: 1) When the