"On" is better because it implies on top. If you say "At the center of the brick" there is the possibility for me to think you drilled into the brick to put the detector inside. Of course, if the context of the sentence discredits this possibility, then either one is fine.
In examples #2 and #3, the infinitive expresses purpose, and the placement is natural. Example #1 is different; studying in America would be the content of the opportunity but not its purpose. (Opportunities may serve purposes, but do they have purposes?)
In situations like this, it is always appropriate to use with.
Do you have your car with you?
Do you have your computer with you?
Do you have your pen with you?
If the item is small- a pen, a wallet or a phone that can be placed in a pocket, so that you are effectively wearing it, you can also use on. The Cambridge Dictionary, in the entry for ...
 We are agreeable to the terms of the settlement and herewith
enclose our check for Rs 10000.
 Agreeable to the terms of the settlement, we herewith enclose our
check for Rs 10000.
No, the element in bold is not an infinitival clause modifying "we", but an AdjP (adjective phrase).
In  the AdjP is a predicative complement licensed by "be",...
"Up" is a preposition, and "to" is a preposition.
But "up-to-date" is indeed an adjective. My dictionary lists it, as Gustavson says, with hyphens. However I don't think his suggestion for the adverbial "up to date" is very common.
The more usual word I have heard in American use for the phrase you want is "to date": "... in full settlement of your claims ...
"Agreeably" seems like a mistake. If I had to write this kind of legalese (and I probably wouldn't) "agreeable" sounds like the usual language.
Agreeable to the terms of this settlement ...
However, while this may be a common expression I think it's a little odd for this context. While "agreeable" does imply that the money agrees with the (agreed-on) ...
1A. Some people value the beliefs in respect.
1B. Some people value respect beliefs
Neither of these is correct, adn i am not at all sure what the intended meaning is. It might be:
Some people value respecting the beliefs of others.
2A. The president gave him an approval to the policy.
2B. The president gave him a policy approval
2A is ...
The correct answer is John is two weeks out of surgery. You can also simply say John had the surgery two weeks ago.
Two weeks away from surgery implies that he will have surgery in two weeks’ time.
Two weeks from/off surgery don’t work, either. To say someone is two weeks off something generally means that for two weeks, they have not been indulging in ...
This use sounds ok, but means that it has been two weeks since the surgery ended. However "the" would have to be deleted for it to sound more natural. A more common way this is said is "John has been out of surgery for two weeks"
This makes sense and would mean that after two more weeks, John will have the surgery
1 is the most common, 3 is the most formal – in fact, it would probably strike many native speakers as comically formal. 2 would be considered wrong by most educated native speakers of standard American English (because it ends in a preposition), but is common in some American English dialects; even some people who know it's "wrong" might use it sometimes in ...
The company's turnover was up 3% compared to the previous year. I'd say up is being used as an adjective here; turnover is up. It's meaning 2.b. of up as an adjective here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/up
Or check here: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/adverbs-of-place-and-movement/up for a rundown of different uses of ...
Yes, this is valid, particularly for spoken English, and probably for the technical context that I am assuming this came from.
For formal/written English one would probably use 'of', 'concerning' or 'regarding' in preference.
You are asking whether omitting a preposition from a phrasal verb makes any difference. Well, if you go by the definition, it mentions -
a phrase that consists of a verb with a preposition or adverb or both, the meaning of which is different from the meaning of its separate parts
While in most of the cases, it's true, in some cases, as in here, it makes ...
You can find both the instances where on/in is used. And yes, both can be used. Nevertheless, in my humble opinion, the preposition 'on' is more preferred when the platform is online.
I have 399 registered people on my FB page.
I have 23 students in my group or circle.
So, if the book club is online, I'd prefer using 'on.'
Again, both are ...
Following these guidelines will allow your sentences to sound more accurate and natural, and less awkward:
Congratulations on generally could be followed by a noun.
- Congratulations on the new promotion!
- Congratulations on your achievements!
- Congratulations on the new house!
Congratulations for generally could be followed by a verb.
- Congratulations ...
Both "on" and "for" are correct. You can use the prepositions when talking about what someone is praised for. But there seems to be a slight difference. You congratulate someone on something when that something is their solid achievement. You congratulate someone for something when they have contributed to something successful:
I really must congratulate ...
"On" is one of those words with many nuances. Look at all of the various definitions here https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/on - 5c and 6b carry the meanings you have in mind. Grammatically, it's a preposition, as you noted. Also, as you noted, "on" is generally the word I would use with US English with reference to a play, movie, or show - either ...
If you are speaking literally, "in" usually carries the meaning of "surrounded by", or "completely enclosed":
"There's a fly in my soup."
"The dog is in the doghouse."
"I made an error in that sentence."
and "on" implies "attached to" or "touching":
"I wish I were a fly on the wall."
"They were on bikes."
"We put another coat of ...
‘in spite of’, ‘despite’ and ‘although’ are all used to show contrast and are used for the same meaning. The only difference is the way they are used; the structure in which they are used.
‘in spite of’ and ‘despite’ are placed in front of a noun or pronoun:
We had a great time in spite of the rain.
We had a great time despite the rain.
Let's take these one at a time
man of steel to steel man
These ought to mean the same thing but "man of steel" has connotations to Superman that steel man does not have.
the pain of separation to the separation pain
These are very close; to me, the former sounds more natural. Google Ngram Viewer confirms that the former is much more common than the ...
In some of these cases you may reverse the order, but this often changes the nuance. For example "the man of steel" by default, is considered a figurative expression, but "the steel man" is, by default, literal. In this case "of" means something closer to "like" than "is". Superman is not made of steel, but he is impenetrable like steel.
There was a bird across the window.
This only works if the bird is splayed out across the window, or if the bird has struck the window, and its dead or injured body is spread across it. Not at all the intended meaning.
2- There was a bird across from the window.
This implies that the bird is somehow opposite the window, perhaps on the other side of a ...
I would expect to hear or red sentences 1, 5 and 6, but never 4 or 2, and rarely 3.
"Across America" is a particularly common phrase, perhaps because of the alliteration. For an alternative, one might say "throughout America" but in my experience that is far less common. I can't recall having encountered "through America" in this sense, although I have ...
The first sentence is correct. "Set foot at" is very rare, per this Google Books Ngram Viewer chart, compared to "set foot on".
"at" would imply a specific place, rather than a general one (like the island of Okinawa). Something like "set foot at the very spot on Ellis Island where our grandparents had once stood".
Really, the time of day during business hours should have no effect on day counting. "I'll be back in 3 days" or "come back in 3 days" really should be counting from the day after today as day-1. Say today is just past midnight on Monday and someone says "come back in 3 days", when should you go back? The third day after today - Thursday. Since today has ...
The gerund used in the original sentences works as a noun expressing an action. A speaker can find something good or not so good in that action.
Replacing or removing that preposition is sometimes possible, but not in all these examples. The first sentence after modification at least can get a second meaning and sound like 'There is no shame that wants to ...
In this case, really none. Generally we spend money for a purpose, or we spend money on a thing. But the distinction is a little muddled and, as in this case, you can often find both prepositions in use for the same thing.
1- To "walk through the city" is usually a short way of saying "walk through the streets of the city". so it's correct to say that even if you remain inside the city. It is assumed that the city is large enough that you wouldn't have left it.
Example "I walked through the city from Trafalgar Square to St Paul's Cathedral"
2- No, strangely enough if you want ...
Quick summary: You should say "correction(s) to" when describing tangible, countable changes, but "correction of" when describing the general act of correcting, but no one is likely to care if you mix it up.
Right away, we can rule out "corrections with." This has a different meaning: "with" introduces an object which is doing or aiding the corrections. For ...
Sometimes more than one preposition can be used, and the meaning stays pretty much the same. For example:
This happened in the year 1893.
This happened during the year 1893.
Other times, only one preposition is idiomatic. In this case, rooted in is an expression that even gets its own entry in the Merriam-Webster dictionary:
rooted in (idiom) ...
Look at the tree. Where are its roots? IN the ground, literally.
Just like a tree, which has its roots in the ground, things may have roots in something. Now, by roots we mean origins or background of something (e.g. The Association has its roots in the early 1950s.) Therefore, if something has roots in something, it is rooted in something (again, think ...
In this context, "pending" means more something like "waiting for". Let's break the sentence down a bit:
Apartheid legislation was repealed on 17 June 1991, pending fully democratic, multiracial elections set for April 1994.
The first part is clear enough: "Apartheid legislation was repealed on 17 June 1991". That date is when the decision was finalized ...
That would be because "be-" is a prefix that is almost always added to verbs and makes nouns and verbs. It means something along the lines of "cause".
It is, by no means, a recent one, so you're bound to come across examples where the verb is no longer distinguishable and doesn't exist in modern English, as is the case with "believe". The most common ...
It turns out that these actually depend a bit on how you conceptualize "the internet" and where it is and how you access it! And different people have somewhat different conceptions of that so we end up with language that's not in practice standardized across common usage.
You're treading an area where prepositions are a bit fuzzy in making the transition ...
I would say that "I can only watch it by Wi-Fi." isn't normal usage, but the other three are all fine.
Since I work in IT, the first one grates a little, and 'via' is better, but for everday usage the reverse is probably true.
Although this is a matter of style, and hence subjective, the simplest way of looking at this is as an example of an elided parallel construction.
As such, the following would be the complete version:
The tax burden on domestic companies is 30 percent higher than the tax burden on international companies.
And the following would be the shortened version:...
The form "insist on" is used with nouns and noun phrases; whereas "insist" alone is used to with finite clauses (clauses that can be sentences on their own).
For the three examples that you gave, two are grammatical:
I insist that he does his homework now.
I insist he does his homework now.
These are both okay, because "that" is usually optional when used ...
The word "to" is generally used after the verb "pay" to indicate the purpose of the payment, not the recipient.
I pay him to mow my lawn.
John pays to park his car in a protected space.
"To" can be used to indicate the recipient in constructions such as:
Jane will pay $500 to Fred.
In a case of garnishment, the employer pays part of the ...
Per your comments, it would be "we need someone down in the back" or "we need someone in the back" or "we need someone down back." Contrast that with "we need someone up in the front."
If one is in the process of moving toward the back that is when you would use "to the back".
Example: I moved to the back of the bus when more people got on.
Also, "on the ...
Graphite is the material used in pencils, but is never used when referring to a writing format. Instead, we use "pencil". You would use "in a pencil" as follows: "What qualities are you looking for in a pencil? I want it to be medium hardness with an eraser."
In your second example, 'the topic of' is very much superfluous; 'regarding' is more appropriate in your letter because you are replying in regard to something, whilst 'on the topic of' is more something one would say in a conversation, having actually just discussed that topic, directing it specifically to something else you want to talk about.
'Re the ...
In this context, 'pencil', like 'ink', is a material. You can use in with materials, but it wouldn't make sense for something to be in a pencil. 'A pencil' refers to the tool, and so one uses 'with' i.e. with a pencil.
If an English person said write in a pencil, I would understand 'a pencil' to mean "a particular type or colour of the material 'pencil'". ...