+0
Questions about and

1)The robber has taken all valuable things away from his house and (has) run way from/against being arrested by police.

Should I put has after the word and ?My teacher says after the word and,it means that is another beginning of expression.Hence, we cannot relate with the previous tense in use,but have to add another one.

Is it correct ?

And I should use from or against in this sentence ?

For more instances,

a)The leader cautioned us to be quiet and (to) stay still.

b)They were inflicted on them by those militiamen who abused the right as passing through a checkpoint and (being) checked.

c)He smiles and (is) happy of getting a fantastic present from her father.

Should I add these bracket-words ?

Question about OR,

2)The word or is also identical with the rule ?

Her story could not be verified,it was unclear whether she had escaped or (had) been released.

Would you like to be recorded in black list or (being) punished with cane ?

Should I add these bracket-words ?

3)In negative sentence,we cannot use the word and but or,correct ?
a)I do not have car,house or money.
bI can go nowhere now,even road,fairground or other houses.

Cannot-I do not have car,house and money/I can go nowhere now,even road,fairground and other houses.Right ?
1 2
Comments  
My general advice is that, yes, use parallel verb forms, even though it is informally acceptable to drop some of the form. However, many of these sentences do not make sense or are not clear as they are written. I have reworded some of them to show you how they could be expressed.

1)The robber has taken all valuable things away from his house and (has) run way from/against being arrested by police.

Should I put has after the word and ?My teacher says after the word and,it means that is another beginning of expression.Hence, we cannot relate with the previous tense in use,but have to add another one.

Is it correct ?

And I should use from or against in this sentence ?
Yes, I would use "has" in both places to keep the tenses in parallel formation. However, neither "from" nor "against" works with the existing wording. Say instead:
"The robber has removed all the valuable things from his house and has run away to avoid being arrested by the police."

For more instances,

a)The leader cautioned us to be quiet and (to) stay still.
Yes, "to" in both places for absolute parallelism. But it is acceptable without.

b)They were inflicted on them by those militiamen who abused the right as passing through a checkpoint and (being) checked.
This is unclear. I don't know what you want to say here. If I were to guess, I would word the sentence as follows:

They were beaten by the militiamen who abused their authority to search people on their way through the checkpoint.

c)He smiles and (is) happy of getting a fantastic present from her father.
Yes, you need the second verb "is." But the wording, again, is wrong.
He smiles and is happy to get a fantastic present from her father.

Should I add these bracket-words ?

Question about OR,

2)The word or is also identical with the rule ?

Her story could not be verified,it was unclear whether she had escaped or (had) been released.
Again, add the second "had" for full parallelism. But it is acceptable without. Also, the comma after "verified" is incorrect. Either start a new sentence there or use a colon.

Would you like to be recorded in black list or (being) punished with cane ?
Would you prefer to be black listed or be punished with a cane?

Should I add these bracket-words ?

3)In negative sentence,we cannot use the word and but or, correct ? Emotion: yes
a)I do not have a car, house or money.
b) I can go nowhere now,even road, fairground or other houses. (This makes no sense. Do you mean to say "I can go nowhere now, not even to the road, the fairgrounds, or to other houses"?)

Cannot-I do not have car,house and money/I can go nowhere now,even road,fairground and other houses.Right ?

I hope this helps.
Doctor Duse parallel verb forms, even though it is informally acceptable to drop some of the form
What would you like to mean that ' it is informally acceptable to drop some of the form ' .Could you explain to me in more detail.Thank you very much and kindly.
Doctor DHowever, many of these sentences do not make sense or are not clear as they are written. I have reworded some of them to show you how they could be expressed.
Thanks for your corrections of my wrong wordings,I'll keep improving my English sentences.
Doctor DYes, I would use "has" in both places to keep the tenses in parallel formation.
In your opinion,do you think that keeps the tense in parallel formation is essential or must-do in writing a formal English article/essay ?How about informal English,is it necessary in usual daily conversation or acceptable in either present or not ?
Doctor DThey were beaten by the militiamen who abused their authority to search people on their way through the checkpoint.
I would like to know what is the clearer difference between authority,right and power.Could you tell me ? Thanks.
Doctor Db) I can go nowhere now,even road, fairground or other houses. (This makes no sense. Do you mean to say "I can go nowhere now, not even to the road, the fairgrounds, or to other houses"?)
Oh,haven't I to use 'not even' in a negatively structural sentence but 'even' in that of positive ?

1)I do not have anything,not even house,car or relationship.

2)I have everything,even house,car and relationship.

Am I correct of that ?
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
In informal conversation, it is acceptable to shorten up some of the wording. That is, people understand what you are saying and do not think you are speaking poorly. However, in formal essay writing, I would always use the complete form.
For example:

She's run out of money and lost all her possessions. (Conversational version).

She has run out of money and has lost all of her possessions. (Formal written version.)

Authority, right, power
"Power" implies simple brute force (the ability to force an outcome)

"Authority" implies a legal right to act.
"Right" implies an underlying moral validity to an action.
So which term you choose depends on the situation you are describing.

Yes, you are correct regarding "even" and "not even." However, you need to add the articles:

1) I do not have anything, not even a house, a car or a relationship.
2) I have everything, even a house, a car and a relationship.
(However, in #2, I would have said "including" instead of "even.")
Doctor DShe's run out of money and lost all her possessions. (Conversational version).
She has run out of money and has lost all of her possessions. (Formal written version.)
Okay,I can see your point here.

But how about the sentence shown below.

-We should be strong and (be) steady to face bravely and (to) fight against all the obstacles that are coming up.

Should I add the bracket-words above to meet the parallel formation ?

By the way,allowing me to state a question here that is relevant to the words all,any,every and some that if these words posses the following noun which is with a pronoun,then I have to use the preposition 'of ' to match the structure of this sentence in formal English.I hope you can understand what I mean.

For examples:
1)I have some/nothing/all/every of your own thing(s).However,I have all/every/some thing(s).( If without a pronoun )
2)I have no any of your own things.

Here,I would like to state approximately about the difference between wealth,property and possession and seek for your view/correction if that is wrong.

Wealth and property implies money only.
Possession implies all things that include your own property,your family,reputation and relationship.
Am I correct ?
To answer your new questions...

But how about the sentence shown below?
We should be strong and (be) steady, to face bravely and (to) fight against all the obstacles that are coming up.

Should I add the bracket-words above to meet the parallel formation ?

This is more a matter of style than of grammar. But I would either put both of the bracket words in or leave both out. This would make the style of your larger phrases match. (...be strong and steady... to face bravely and fight...)

By the way,allowing me to state a question here that is relevant to the words all,any,every and some that if these words posses the following noun which is with a pronoun,then I have to use the preposition 'of ' to match the structure of this sentence in formal English.I hope you can understand what I mean.
For examples:
1)I have some/nothing/all/every of your own thing(s). However,I have all/every/some thing(s).( If without a pronoun )

The different terms require different wording (and "own" is not needed):

I have some of your things.

I have nothing of yours.

I have all of your things.
I have everything of yours.
The "However" sentence does not quite make sense. If you are making an exception ("however"), it only works with "some." You cannot make an exception if you really have all or everything or none.

I have some of your things. However, I do not have everything.

2)I have no any of your own things.
"No any" is incorrect. I have none of your things. Or: I do not have any of your things.

Wealth, property, possessions.
Each term can be used in more than one way.
However "wealth" generally refers to items that have monetary value (they can be traded for cash). This would include money, jewels, stocks, etc.
"Property" refers to something you possess, especially to real estate. It also suggests that you have a legal right to that item.
"Possessions" include anything that is in your ownership or control, but usually refers to physical objects, like furniture, not intangibles like reputation.

Does this answer your questions?
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Doctor DThis is more a matter of style than of grammar. But I would either put both of the bracket words in or leave both out. This would make the style of your larger phrases match. (...be strong and steady... to face bravely and fight...)
In this case,I think of the parallel formation as being quite unnecessary,what it would do to the sentence is to make it more complicated and longer seemingly.Therefore,parallelism can be left out as long as the words between 'and' match mutually,especially in term of adjective separated with 'and',according to my experience,I can hardly see the parallel information used in adjective like:He is perceptive and (is) sensitive. Am I correct of my view ?
Doctor DThe different terms require different wording (and "own" is not needed):

I have some of your things.

I have nothing of yours.

I have all of your things.
I have everything of yours.
The "However" sentence does not quite make sense. If you are making an exception ("however"), it only works with "some." You cannot make an exception if you really have all or everything or none.

I have some of your things. However, I do not have everything.

Sorry about my unclear information has led you to get wrong of what I mean however here,it meant actually the word while to make a comparison to the part of 'have' and another of 'have not'.

Hence,if there is a pronoun/owner present,I have to put 'of ' in the sentence,correct ?

I have lost all of my things.While
I have lost all things.

Doctor D"Possessions" include anything that is in your ownership or control, but usually refers to physical objects, like furniture, not intangibles like reputation.

So,what word does reputation or love belong to ?



1) Leaving out the parallel forms is okay in the example we looked at. However, you cannot always drop them out. Sometimes they are needed for clarity, especially in longer sentences where you can lose track of what is being said.

2) however, while...if I understood you, you simply wanted to compare two kinds of sentences (so "however" and "while" were not part of those sentences?).

Again, it is correct to use "of" but in conversation it is sometimes dropped.
I have lost all my ducks. I have lost all of my ducks. (Either is acceptable).
Same with
I have lost all the ducks. I have lost all of the ducks. (Either is acceptable)

I have lost none of the ducks. ("of" is required)

Of course you don't need "of" in the case where you are not detailing what sort thing you have lost.
I have lost nothing/everything.
("All things" is not standard. However you could say: I have lost all the things that matter to me.)

3) reputation or love. When we say that a person has or possesses a good reputation (or love), we do so poetically, extending verbs that apply to physical objects to include mental objects. You cannot touch or otherwise control "love" or "reputation." So it is only by metaphor that you "possess" them. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that you "enjoy" them (because joy is fleeting).
Okay,I got it.Hence,parallel form can be dropped out as long as the words between 'and' match mutually,especially in term of adjective separated with 'and'.

He is confident of and (to) believe you in able to success for your career.
-In this case,one is adjective but another one is verb,so I should put 'to' in the sentence.

He is aggressive and (is) hard-working in studying with an expectation to get a good grade on his final exam result.

-In this case,both are adjectives,so the 'is' is unessential and always to be dropped out.

Am I correct of my view of that ?
Doctor D1) However, you cannot always drop them out. Sometimes they are needed for clarity, especially in longer sentences where you can lose track of what is being said.
As for this case,can you give me a long example showing parallel form is essential to appear in the sentence ?
Doctor D("All things" is not standard. However you could say: I have lost all the things that matter to me.)
Could you tell me what (I have lost all the things that matter to me) mean ?

I have lost my (reputation,love,relationship,belief and power).

What a single word can represent the bracketed sentence completely ?Possession ?
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more