Yes, they are exactly the same thing in meaning.
The only difference is in grammatical usage as far as talking about a future date. "This" would only be used on that day. "It is" (or "it's") could be used to talk about the current day or a day in the future, as in "I'm going visit my father's grave on Sunday because it's the fifth anniversary of his death....
"a chat" or "a conversation" are not things you can possess. They are activities which you do. Given this, as you can see from the definition you quoted, you can not use "have got" with "chat"/"conversation". You must use "have".
I think you may be confused because an "appointment" is not the same thing as what the appointment is for. An "appointment to ...
In academic texts, one uses: Smith et al. to refer to more than one author for an article or book.
Et al refers to other authors, not other words.
Here is a formal explanation of it:
APA Style Guide
Writers sometimes use the surname of the first author followed by et al. at the first mention of a work that has three, four, or five authors. Only when a ...
"et al." is an abbreviation of the latin phrase "et alii" (meaning "and others"), which is two words ("et" and "alii"), so this should be treated as two words in English text as well. Breaking the line between these words is fine, and it should not be hyphenated when broken across lines.
All of the rest of the words are just ordinary English words, so ...
"Change over to" means to switch from one thing to another. It adds more meaning than simply the word "change".
"I changed from a phone to a tablet" could mean that you got rid of your phone and replaced it with a tablet. If you want to get surreal you could also suggest that it means you were a phone, and then you became a tablet (consider "he changed from ...
"lead in" almost always comes before "the direction of" and it implies a future-tense state, as in "
This road will lead in the direction of-
Note: the proper past tense version of "Lead" is "Led"
"Led to" implies a consequence of action, such as
"Robbing that bank led to my time in prison"
"Lead To" can't really be used properly in a sentence, ...
....causing us to react as if we were are being chased by a predator.
as if we were being chased by a predator is the correct way of saying it.
"Slaves were treated as if they were animals"
"Tonight we celebrate as if we are immortal"
Would you mind if I is always followed by the simple past.
Would you mind if I smoked a cigarette? (incorrect: would you mind if I smoke ...)
The meaning of this sentence is : may I smoke a cigarette? or is it alright if I smoke?
Would you mind is followed by -ing (a gerund).
Would you mind closing the windows?
The meaning of this sentence is : I don't ...
I would advise against using words like "loop" or "wrap" - it seems out of context with measurements of time. Time doesn't "loop" - it is continuous. Even when moving from the hour of midnight to one in the morning, this is a continuation of the measurement of time.
Similarly, don't use "increase" - because time doesn't "increase" unless you are speaking ...
This is only my analysis
1) If numbers in your timer turn around when a minute or an hour elapses ,
the verb "to flip" would mean this
According to Cambridge Dictionary :
If something flips, it turns over quickly
based on this definition :
If it is 23:37 , and you hit the hour button , the display flips to 24:00 .
If it is 23:37 , and you hit the ...
(I thought I had answered this question or one like it, but can't find any trace of it.)
You can use any of those expressions to mean that you have nobody else with you.
Alone can also mean that you are the only person to whom something has happened - "I alone survived the accident."
On my own can also mean that you did something without help - "I found ...
I think perhaps I got an idea what it is you want to do, but not guaranteed.
For the three situations you describe, I make suggestions as follows.
the display loops/wraps to 00:37/ The display will show 00:37/ shows 00:37.
the display blocks/stays at 23:37/ The display remains at 23:37/ remains at 23:37.
the display becomes/rounds to 24:00/ The display ...
"whose" is the possessive form of "who":
"I" --> "my"
"he" --> "his"
"who" --> "whose"
Therefore, it generally needs a noun to be possessed:
Whose ball is this?
I am a man whose arms are strong.
"Who" is the nominative (subject) form, so it should be used anywhere you need a subject for a sentence or a clause:
I am an intelligent and independent ...
Here's a link to Wikipedia
I found this statement in the article:
"Ministers resident formed an intermediate class, between ministers and chargés. This rank was created by the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle."
I get the impression that "minister" is an obsolete term, but I suggest you consult the article above to be sure.
I agree that "astound" isn't used for the physical sense. I think "stun", in the figurative sense of a psychological reaction, is actually stronger than "astound".
The word "astound" connotes very strong surprise, while "stun" in the figurative sense suggests a reaction similar to the effect of a physical blow, such as momentary paralysis.
In the first sentence, she know the car park already and she looks out of the window to see the car park. Although, in the second sentence, she doesn't know about car park. She first looks out of the window, and see the car park (maybe for the first time).
The first "to see a car park outside" indicates that the purpose of looking out the window was in order to see that thing.
The second form "and sees" indicates that she looked, and when she looked, that is what she saw. It does not indicate a purpose to looking out the window.
Both forms are a bit awkward. They sound like somebody is recalling events in "...
The conditional "that would be mine" is being used only as a tactful and polite way of saying "that is mine".
Asking "Whose phone is that" has an element of "blame" (someone has lost their phone) so it is not surprising that there is some redundant language that makes the language less direct. "If you are demanding then I would tell you that it is my ...
One typical online dictionary (Dictionary.com) includes as definitions for 'take on', to accept as a challenge) and for 'take up', to accept, as an offer or challenge , so there's not a lot of difference there.
The first possible difference, as Hearth said in a comment, is that 'take on' implies that the challenge was given to you by someone, while 'take up'...
The difference is that the first one is slightly ambiguous. It could mean that you have been running to get to a place, or it could mean that you have been running in the place you are in now, maybe for exercise.
Hope that helps!
You seem to be describing a situation where the increment is always 15 minutes, and the normal behavior is to increment the countdown time by that amount.
If that is the case, then what you call case 3 is the same as any other case in the allowed range- the countdown time increments correctly to 24:00.
In case 1 you could say loop or wrap, or wrap ...
For sentence (1), either singular or plural could be used. It does not matter that "people" earlier is plural, because "people" is actually not the subject of that verb (it is only part of a sub-clause used to set the context for the main sentence). The core of the main sentence is actually:
Wearing a medical mask in the community is not recommended.
Most of those options are actually reasonably natural, but you might choose one or another if you wanted to emphasize certain aspects more.
The only one that sounds a little strange is #4 ("the body of Mike"). It just sounds a bit unnecessarily wordy (most people would just say "Mike's body" instead)
As for which to use when, it's mostly a stylistic thing:...
If someone says that you had better do something, they mean you should do that thing, now or soon. If they say that you had better be doing something, they mean that they expect you to be doing that thing now (or already), and the speaker will be angry (or you will get in trouble, or a bad thing will happen) if you are not.
the verb would is the past tense of will (and also used as a conditional, but not here):
"why didnot you meet me at the station?"
Correction: Why didn't you meet me at the station.
B said: "I was busy in completing my work. I know you would understand.
Correction: I was busy finishing my work. I knew you would understand.
Here is the rule:
There are some problems with the sentences you are looking at. They should say:
A said "Why did you not meet me at the station?"
B said "I was busy completing my work. I knew you would understand."
The reason B uses 'would' here is because they are speaking about themselves in the past imagining this future hypothetical situation - "I knew (at the time) ...
Both are grammatically correct. And they mean the same thing.
"There are not people like you at my school" might be considered a little awkward. I'd probably say "There are no people like you at my school", or "There are not any ..." like your example. But it's correct as is and would not confuse anyone.
Side note: In your "bread" example, "bread" is a ...
If you say, to the students at the other school, that there aren't any nice people like them at your school, you are saying something negative about the people at your school, but you are saying something positive or friendly about (and to) the people at the other school.
A beam of light is like the output of a car's headlight, a torch (flashlight) or a searchlight, and can be quite wide.
A ray of light is a thin line, such as the first flash of light at dawn, or in a scientific experiment with prisms, or a mathematical theoretical item (the linear equivalent of a point).
A streak of light suggests motion, such as the trace ...
I suggest the sentence should be one of these two constructions
If I tell her about this, how will that do?
If I told her about this, how would that do?
Then the grammar is consistent, the second one being in the subjunctive mood.
I agree with the other answer saying that in the case of drawing back his hand, the use of draw implies less effort than would pull. But this is very context dependent, and I think in your other example, using draw implies effort.
By the way I can 't find a suitable translation for 'power of drawing out the social side'. What does it mean?
Here, power ...
'draw' implies action with little or no resistance.
'pull' is to apply force (toward ones' self), implying it takes effort.
Similar in meaning. The context in which they are used together would define the difference.
"You can draw your own conclusions here, if you can manage to pull the notion of their complexity from your thoughts"
"Missing" and "lost" are very similar in meaning, with just a subtle difference: "missing" is about location, when something is not in the place where it should be, whereas "lost" is about knowledge, when one does not know where something is. "My shoes are missing" means they're not where I expected to find them. "My shoes are lost" means I don't know where ...
This is a difference in meaning, and in particular the meaning of "expensive".
Would you say "It is expensive" or "It was expensive"?
If by "expensive" you mean "the cost when you bought it" the this is a past fact you are talking about. Since it is in the past (and modal verbs don't have a past tense) you need to use the perfect "must have been". "It ...
Both work the same, but option 2 sounds much more natural. Option 1 makes you sound like a robot, so I would recommend avoiding it.
(This response is specific to American dialect, so it may or may not apply to you.)
All three of these have similar meaning, and can be used interchangeably in many cases. They have slightly different implications in some contexts:
"sit next to me" implies sitting in the very next seat, on one side or the other. How close that is will depend on how closely the seats are spaced, however.
"sit beside me" often implies sitting fairly close, ...
A base is the start of something, or the home of something.
A structure is something that has parts that are connected together that can be replaced or customized.
A substructure would be a structure that's part of a bigger structure.
Bases can be structures, and structures can be bases. A base is unlikely to be a substructure, but might have one or more ...
I think your understanding is reasonably close to correct, but it may be stated in a slightly more complicated way than is necessary. I would summarize the difference between these two tenses (in general) as:
Simple Past Tense
The simple past is the most neutral form. It just says that something occurred in the past, and doesn't say anything else (about ...
You say 'go out' when you're either going somewhere with friends or when you're in a relationship you're going out with your partner.
-I'm just going out for a walk. Do you want to come?
-She has been going out with him for ages.
'Go outside' means go outside like out of your home, room etc.
-I'm going outside ...
From Lexico continue:
2.2 US Law [with object] Postpone or adjourn (a legal proceeding)
'the case was continued without a finding until August 2'
Your sentence means:
All guilty pleas and violation of probation matters [...] must be postponed until after April 13, 2020, [...]
So, the hearings will stop until 13 April 2020, then resume (...
You can say "How much is it?" about something that has already been mentioned, example:
I like that hat. How much is it?.
You can say "How much is that?" or "How much does that item cost?" about something that you indicate (possibly by pointing at it). "How much is it/that?" and "How much does it/that cost?" are ways of saying the same thing.
"My PC needs repairing." can be used. It sounds a bit informal. You could also say "My PC needs repair."
Those could be used whether you will have someone else do the repair, or do it yourself.
I have to get my PC repaired." is also usable. The focus there is on your need rather than the computer's need, and "get my PC repaired" means you will have ...
What should I do?
This is asking "what is the correct or best thing to do?". It doesn't say anything about what actually will happen, just asks what would be the right thing in this situation (but it often implies that once you figure out the right thing, you will probably also then go ahead and do it):
I want to go to my friend's party, but I also told ...