+0
Could you please check if the following sentences are grammatically correct and if they sound right?

Due to the fact that/Because he had lost his notes, he decided to present using the information from the internet.

Prior to the presentation he had lost his notes; therefore/consequently, he decided to present using the information from the internet.

Prior to the presentation he had lost his notes; he, therefore/consequently, decided to present using the information from the internet.

Prior to the presentation he had lost his notes; he decided to present using the information from the internet, therefore/consequently.

Due to /because of his lost notes, he decided to present using the information from the internet.

Thank you very much for your help

Hope
1 2 3
Comments  (Page 3) 
I disagree. As I said, the rules don't change, the usage does.

And teachers are probably more likely to hold on to the "old ways" longer than most. I think Internet bloggers and magazine writers are the most likely to start using words in new ways.
Hi, GG

Thanks for the quick reply. I am afraid I couldn't make out "grammar" from "usage". As far as I have learned, "grammar" is generalized rules about how to use words and how to combine them into sentences. Am I wrong?

paco
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
Here's an example of what I consider a grammar rule: A sentence must have a subject (even if it's implied) and a verb. That's not going to change.

The president is going to fly by helicopter to Camp David.

Here's an example of what I consider a change in usage: helicopter is now a verb. Will the president helicopter to Camp David? Someone who only thought of helicopter as a noun would have a hard time finding the verb - that person could be thinking "will the president do WHAT?" It's not that we decided that that rule about needing a verb isn't necessary anymore - it's that somewhere along the line, we decided that a new verb had entered our vocabulary.

Another rule says that a transitive verb needs an object.

But a change in how "present" is USED now allows it also have an intranstive meaning. He presented without once looking at his notes. Transitive verbs still need objects - that rule hasn't changes. But intranstive verbs do not, and a new intransitive verb has entered our vocabulary.
Grammar Geek But a change in how "present" is USED now allows it also have an intranstive meaning. He presented without once looking at his notes. Transitive verbs still need objects - that rule hasn't changes. But intranstive verbs do not, and a new intransitive verb has entered our vocabulary.
But I'm not sure if I could covey my meaning corectly to other people if I say "Professor, I want to present" without giving any other context.

paco
Hi Paco,

. . . if I say "Professor, I want to present" without giving any other context . . . . In reality, you wouldn't just walk into a room and say this. The context is what was said before, as well as what is said after, as well as the situation in whch you find yourself, eg a classroom in which people have been presenting information all afternoon, and now you want to do it.

I have a feeling that, in North America, English teachers are first runners in the throw-off of old grammar rules. This is counter to my experience. I find English teachers tend to see themselves as custodians of the language, and to be reluctant to accept changes. Furthermore, I think this reluctance increases even more as the teacher's age increases. Yet a good teacher realizes that to ignore the realities of language change is not in the students' best interest. These are merely subjective comments, of course, as was yours.

Best wishes, Clive
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
I think it would be possible the professor answers "Oh, thank you! And what do you have for the present?"

paco
Hi,

As a joke, yes, otherwise no.

Best wishes, Clive
I love you. Thanks for the help!
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?