+0
Is the preposición "at" correct in the following sentence?

It would have been nice meeting you at ATIA 2004 Conference.

Please, tell me if there is any mistake in the sentence .

Thanks in advanced
Comments  
It's correct. The preposition "at" implies "temporarily", that's why we say "at school", "at the theater" or "at the movies". You eat "at a restaurant", but a waiter works "in a restaurant".

Hope this helps! Emotion: smile
Also, I think it should be 'at the ATIA 2004 Conference'.
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
yes, it is!
dinosmAlso, I think it should be 'at the ATIA 2004 Conference'.
Correct!
After being away over a month, I am happy to be back in the US.

This sentence caught my attention and so I am going to toss my two cents into the mix.

”It would have been nice meeting you at ATIA 2004 Conference” This is not a complete thought in my opinion. The blue part immediately offers a conditional scenario which is to be followed by an “if” clause.



It was nice meeting you at the ATIA 2004 Conference- This is fine

The vacation would have been perfect if we could stay for a few more days. - ok

My thought: "AT" is the right prep. but not for the reason of being temporary although phrases like "at the moment", "at the movie" and "at the bank" etc do offer this suggestion.

I am living at home now to spend more time with my parents. - This offers a rather ong and lengthy duration.



Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Hi Goodman

There are lots of perfectly acceptable sentences that imply an IF-clause, but don't actually need to have one.
The sentence "It would have been nice meeting you at the ATIA 2004 Conference" tells me that "meeting you at the conference" is counter-factual, and I would simply expect the broader context to provide further information (for example, the reason why we did not meet at the conference in 2004). Without any broader context, the implied IF-clause is this: "if it had been possible".
GoodmanThe vacation would have been perfect if we could stay for a few more days.
That's not one of the "standard" IF-sentence formations. It's a so-called mixed conditional. The first half of the sentence basically refers to a complete vacation (it begins like a Type 3), and the IF-clause refers to the future (like a Type 2). Here again you would have to rely on the broader context to understand and explain why the verb forms are mixed the way they are. (Or was the mix unintentional?)
Hi Amy,

I understand what you said. I am sure your input is valid. Whether it has an If-clause or not, with this sentence standing alone without addtional context, I just had that incomplete and strangely unclear feeling, You are correct, there was impied context but not everyone can appreciate the simplicity. I have no further comments. Thank you for your reply!
Oh yes, it was my carelessness. It should have been:
The vacation would have been perfect if we could have stayed for a few more days.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?