I need 1 screw-on table leg this like this one.
I need one of these screw-on table legs.
I need a cheaper model of this T-shirt.
I need 1 of these transparent, one-square meter sheets.
You need to work on adjective placement.
If you use one of, what comes afterwards has to be plural.
I need one of these fine, cotton towels.
Sentences 2 and 3 I believe would be grammatically correct if you added an article "a" after "need". e.g. "I need a screwable one of this type of table leg."
As far as I can think that sentence is 'correct', but sounds a little ponderous and unidiomatic. A general format for "one of" sentences which sounds more idiomatic (British English) would be: "I ...
All four of your options are grammatically correct. They just have slightly different connotations.
"The" is a definite article so generally indicates you are talking about a particular / specific instance of the noun. So "price of oil" denotes the price of the commodity in a generic, global sense, whereas "price of the oil" denotes the price of the ...
(1) "I need one the same size as these, only transparent."
"I need a square meter of transparent plastic."
(2) (What does a table leg have to do with it?) "I need one of those that can be screwed to the wall."
(3) "I need a cheaper style of T-shirt."
"I need a T-shirt like this one, only cheaper."
"Pleased with" normally precedes something that you have an active interest or control in.
"Please about" is more appropriate when the subject is not something that you have any active interest or control in.
I am pleased with my exam results.
Your exam results are something you personally worked for, so you are rightly pleased with them.
Yes. Assuming you mean to say that you'll be returning from Singapore in up to a week, you'll want to use within instead. I would also lose the 's time and about parts, so the phrase looks like this:
I expect to return from Singapore within a week.
Sorry, your colleagues are right. During is used, when we are talking about an event, activity or experience (not simply a period of time). In is used in Prepositional phrases, when we are talking about a period of time.
"On the train" is the idiomatic way to refer to being onboard a train.
Remember though that a "train" is the collective term for a series of connected railway carriages or wagons moved by a locomotive. What you are actually in is a train carriage.
So you might say:
I have been standing on the train for hours.
I have been standing in this train ...
'I have been standing on the train for a few hours' would be the correct way to use this sentence regardless of whether you're speaking out loud or writing it down.
I've never heard anybody say or write the phrase 'I have been standing in the train for a few hours'.
Being 'on the train' is the same as being physically inside the train in native English.
Generally, you can't. For example, if you replace the phrase 'ask a question' with 'ask for a question', it will turn question into requested thing: the preposition 'for' here precedes that thing (= the person who asks would like to be asked a question). Sometimes, in informal speech that preposition (before the desired 'forgiveness' in your example) is ...
“Stole data for employees” is ambiguous when considered as a standalone quote with no other information. It could mean the data was stolen to give to the employees, but experience would suggest this as an unlikely situation. Alternatively, it could mean the data which was used for managing the employees. The latter seems a more likely situation (who steals ...
The complexity here is that "tone" is a technical word when talking about colors.
Tone (or Saturation) You can also add both white and black to a color
to create a tone. Tone and saturation essentially mean the same thing,
but most people will use saturation if they're talking about colors
Considering a similar pair of examples from here,
I think there's a slight difference: technically, in version 1 'since' refers to an event (since she told him) while 'since then' refers to 'two days ago' (since that time). Reference to the event (since) in this particular sentence sounds more ...
That is a hard one. "Used in my project" could imply the information helped to supplement other information that was also used. "Used for my project" could mean the same thing or it could mean it formed the basis for the entire project.
Both would be understood, but I tend to agree with you that it should be "the lyrics of the song". The lyrics are considered a part of the song, and as such are spoken of in the possessive, eg "the song's lyrics".
I suspect that the use of "to" comes from the fact that lyrics are words set to music. Historically, a lot of songs began as melodies only, and ...
Personally, I would say that:
Kate is the boss of a company.
Implies that Kate is right at the top and is ultimately in charge. This might be CEO or it might be that Kate runs her own small business. Either way, she doesn't have a boss herself.
Kate is the boss in a company.
Sounds far less natural and a bit more open to interpretation. Are you ...
We would normally say the boss of a company, especially when they are the only boss.
"Boss" is a widely used term, but it isn't a job description. It could be used in place of "manager", but that word really describes what someone does - they manage people, or budgets, or whatever. "Boss" just says they are in charge generally. A person's job role is far ...
The differences in meaning are subtle but real. "Look back on" suggests rumination or reflection, and often has a hint of summing things up or even of nostalgia.
As I look back on our organization's 125-year history...
"Look back to" is often used in contexts involving trying to figure out how to handle some situation where the notion is to find ideas, ...
To 'Look back' is to remember, but it also carries a sense of remembering for a purpose - to examine the past.
I don't think that the 'at/on/to' part is as important to understand than what it means to look back. They would simply be used to complete your thought and as a matter of style.
When I look back to the way I behaved that ...
The written rules in both British and American English say 'arrive to (some place)' is always a mistake.
However, it happens from time to time, even in books ('arrive to school on time' is used often enough). This time, The Guardian's site used the material from its Washington correspondents. US papers wrote '(...
In this case it's not about whether request can or should be followed by to, but whether it takes an indirect object at all. It does not. So even "request the audience" is wrong. One can ask an audience, or invite or beg or implore, or even forbid (though in this last case it would be "forbid the audience from holding).
Another valid option is, "request ...
I have no issue with the use of 'on' like this.
If you want to be more explicit, you could use 'regarding' instead.
Also, whilst some may disagree, I would encourage the use of a comma before the 'and' to disambiguate as to whether you are referring to two or three things:
"On Equations, Series, and the General Method for Solving Questions"
With the ...
"What time do you work until?" would be the most idiomatic of the three; the third option wouldn't be said as it sounds a little ambiguous and could probably be interpreted in a few different ways.
I (British) would usually say this as:
What time do you finish work?
What time do you work till? (more colloquial)
This is not only a matter of grammar, but style. The author of the Facebook post has done a couple of things to emphasize their point.
The first is to treat the descriptive statement 'sad' as noun, as if it were a physical object. Sad in this context is not equal to sadness.
The second is to use 'fit in' to strengthen the idea that a surprisingly large ...
I wouldn't be confused if you say the file is at a specific location:
Your file is at C:\Users\User\Desktop\file.txt
But non-technical users might conceivably be confused by that. You could avoid that with an alternate construction like
The complete path to your file is C:\Users\User\Desktop\file.txt
You would use in if you just want to give the ...
A cup is normally hollow and concave, it is usually used for containing liquid, if we were to compare it to a pool, choosing the most suitable answer in the OP's question should become clear
Kim jumped on / onto the pool (NO)
Water is not a hard solid surface.
Kim jumped on the springboard (YES)
A springboard has a solid surface.
Kim ran and jumped onto ...
Your sentence is not idiomatic. We usually speak of what is "on" a poster whereas we speak of what is "in" an article or book or table.
On this poster, ...
is grammatical and idiomatic as is
On the poster, ...
On this, the poster, ...
would technically be grammatical if properly punctuated, but seldom idiomatic.
However, everything here is odd ...
Need a bit more info. If you really mean a poster (something you stick on a wall) then you would use 'on' but I suspect you mean something else.
If you mean a post (something you put online) then 'in' is correct.
In the moment refers to something that was said or done while experiencing a feeling of fear, dread, happiness, excitement. In that moment is the same but referring to the past.
His son won the race and the father burst into tears in the moment.
At that moment refers to two or more things happening at the same time.
The car hit the curb, at that ...
idiom: a trick to [gerund]. A gerund functions as noun, not a verb. To is a preposition.
The trick to getting better grades is to study more.
The test is: getting better grades.
Can "getting better grades" be used as a noun phrase?
Answer: Yes, it can.
Getting better grades is not always easy.
Another test: What is the trick to this?
"To this" is not a ...
"Of" is very direct, and refers simply to standards pertaining to the subject. A "standard of food safety" could be regarded as a single noun.
"On" is more abstract, and could be understood more by considering that it could be replaced by such term as "with regards to [the subject of]".
The literal and most common meaning of "suck" is to draw into the mouth by contracting the muscles of the lips and mouth to make a partial vacuum. This is the definition that applies in all of your examples.
"Suck" and "suck on" are pretty much interchangeable, and in your latter 2 examples, either could work:
Don't suck your thumb / Don't suck on your ...
You can say “I wrote a letter to you” but it would be more natural to say
I wrote you a letter.
“I wrote a letter for you*”
indicates that you wrote a letter on their behalf because they couldn't do it themselves.
You use part-time as the adverb:
I had to work part-time while I was studying at the university
At least in the UK, we are usually at university.
For this sentence it would be ungrammatical to add "in/as/for". There are similar sentences which have them:
I was in part-time work while ...
I worked as a part-time waiter while ...
I had to work for part of ...
The cost of the school
How expensive the school is to other people.
(Whether this is via tuition fees, or state funding, or both, someone is paying for its running costs)
A cost to the school
How much the school has to pay for something.
(Outgoings - Books, Teacher salaries, etc)
Costs on books
The amount of spending for a particular area (usually ...
We can't say what the cost of school might mean unless we know whether the sentence is about students or about the school's administration. The former is more likely.
Basically: the cost of x = what you have to pay to buy X
The cost to X = what X has to pay for what is needed.
Costs on is not a common usage; probably the writer used it to avoid using ...
I think it is about the determiner.
Since you don't have the determiner, you will say 'parts to her'; otherwise you will say
'some of her parts'
It is the same story with all determiner. e.g.
all (of) her parts
of could be omitted.
more of + determiner/pronoun Before determiners (e.g. a, the, my, his,
her) and pronouns, we use ...
no actually, in fact, the "for" in the beginning sounds very natural, and better than the first one.
it would make sense to skip the "for" if you're saying something like "those who missed the 20 years of the show have been sitting under a rock"
"for those" stands more for a disclaimer or message to the people who missed the 20 years of the show. so for ...
It'd be a single 'at' because Where in your question takes care of the preposition used for the school.
Where do Jack and Jenny arrive? ~ At school.
So, now you add the time's question with just a single at.
Where do Jack and Jenny arrive at 3 pm?
Why would anyone say the very wordy:
The rat ran to a position that is below the booth
The rat ran to and then under the ticket booth
when the sentence below does the job perfectly?
The rat ran/was under the booth
The Oxford Learners' Dictionary says "a position that is below something" to define the preposition “under”.
That's not to say ...
Same used before a noun is always definite: the same X, or less commonly that/this/those/these same X. So one more same X is at least not idiomatic, and I'm not sure it's grammatical.
But it can be used independently, following the noun it qualifies, so
There must be one more piece the same as this.
is fine, and the normal way to express what you are ...
This is how I might express what you are trying to say:
There must be one more piece just like this one.
If you want to sound a bit more formal, you could use:
There must be one more piece identical to this one.
Also, some might find the use of must a little awkward in this context. We could express that part of this thought as follows: ...
For me, it would either be written as past tense:
The priest was very annoyed by his disciples.
Or, you would actually use "at" or "with", specifying the direction/object(s) of his annoyance.
The priest is very annoyed at his disciples.
The priest is very annoyed with his disciples.
You could also say (though I don't find this particularly ...