Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with adverbials
Search options not deleted
user 167137
1
vote
1
answer
39
views
Is "that" omissible after "with the result"?
In CGEL, while discussing the purpose adjuncts "so/in order" + that-clause (p. 727), it is stated that "that" is omissible after "so", but not after "in order".
Under result adjuncts, there is "so/wit …
1
vote
Accepted
Is "that" omissible after "with the result"?
I believe that I have found the answer in CGEL, chapter 11 (content calsuses), under "optional omission of that" (page 953). It gives the following example as favouring retention
I didn’t like his in …