New answers tagged

1

The abrupt changes in weather patterns such as prolonged heatwaves and days of heavy rain are the onset symptoms of climate change. seems fine to me except for; "the onset symptoms". I believe it should be; "the onset of the symptoms". The abrupt changes in weather patterns such as prolonged heatwaves and days of heavy rain are the onset ...


2

A could be a kind, sympathetic enquiry. B and C are more casual (they use fewer words) and could seem less sympathetic. It all depends on the tone of voice and the relationship between the speaker and the person addressed. There is no difference in meaning.


1

First, I don't think you can have copied this out of the book correctly, because what you've written doesn't make any sense. "important one thing ascertaining of fact" is word salad, not English. But it sounds as if the book is oversimplifying, as books for learners often do. Note that verbs of inner state or perception rarely take the progressive, ...


2

While Seowjooheng's answer is good, it may not be complete. As a native Englishman, I interpret the two sentences differently. They reported whatever he did. This means, they watched him (over a period of time), and every single thing he did, they reported. "First he sat down, then he pulled a handkerchief out of his pocket, then he blew his nose, ...


1

[1] They reported whatever it was [that] he did. [2] They reported whatever he did. Both have similar meanings but their sentence structures are different. whatever it was he did is a subordinate interrogative clause functioning as direct object of reported. it and was are the subject and linking verb respectively. I have inserted [that] to show that he ...


1

Both are good. Placing the adverb at the end of the sentence puts a little more emphasis on it. If you aren't trying to emphasise it, then "I'm easily intimidated" is a bit smoother. That's the only tiny difference between the two.


0

I'm intimidated easily. This is not the normal way to write this phrase. It is normally written in the format of your first example. I'm easily intimidated. Easily is an adverb. Adverbs are words used to modify verbs. They usually express the manner in which something is done. They are also used to modify adjectives or another adverb and usually goes ...


0

Both are fine, you often have a choice of adverb placement, either before or after the main verb. For example: I posted quickly without researching. I quickly posted without researching.


0

The minority of us, lucky enough, to have been born... vs The minority of us who are lucky enough to have born... there is no ambiguity in, the original but there is in the newer version. lucky enough is just a modifier and it must relate to "those that have been born". Trying to relate it to "the minority of us" does not work with this ...


0

The words like “wish” and “if only” can be used to describe an alternative version of events that would have happened in place of what you regretted instead. To use them, you use the past perfect tense, after “wish” or “if only”. Like, “If only we had not missed the last flight home, we could have seen her one last time.” When expressing a wish or regret ...


0

Your example sentence is too long-winded. Use a shorter example which has the same overall pattern. A shorter example is sometimes referred to as a minimal example which reproduces the same issues as the original (a MER - minimal reproducible example). Suppose we use the following sentences: The minority of us lucky enough to be wealthy take food for ...


1

I have either expressed myself very badly, or you are purposely mistaking me. Either I have expressed myself very badly, or you are purposely mistaking me. The two sentences mean the same thing. The first version breaks the prescriptive rule about how "either"/"or" is meant to be used, so prescriptivists insist on the second version, ...


0

Well, "Either - Or" is a correlative and "Either" in this context is used to to give emphasis on the exclusive meaning of "Or", so your assumption is correct. The first sentence has a different meaning, we call it semantic factor; however, I wouldn't use the first sentence.


1

The "do" form is not simply emphatic, it has the sense of "contrary to your expectation". I do like dogs! Doesn't mean "I like dogs very much". It means "Although you think I don't like dogs, you are wrong!" It is ungrammatical to use "do" in this structure with modals like can, will or might. I do play ...


2

Yes, it's correct. It's the second item in a list. Only the last item in a list requires a conjunction. Any part of speech, including verb phrases, can be in a list. A more clear-cut example: Most evenings, I play hockey, ride my bike, and walk the dog.


1

redirect is a transitive verb meaning it needs an object. they will be redirected. implies an agent who redirects them somewhere. The agent is your application (your server I suppose). they will be redirected (by the application). which can be omitted since the context makes it clear. Compare it with a sentence put in the active voice. The application ...


1

The answer to your question depends on the antecedent to the pronoun "they" If users look for information page xyz.com they will be redirected to another page. Web searches that send users to xyz.com will redirect to another page. So the first is correct in your case.


2

It's almost grammatical . The verb should be was, not were, because its subject is the singular noun threat. If you change the word order to put the subject first, it would be The threat to his position from the ever-growing commercial activity of the English company was added to these internal rivals.


1

It doesn't belong to "tell". Rather it is part of the description of the bookseller's conception of his own purpose, the one than which there is not "any other". So, his idea of his purpose is to maximize his commissions, letting everything else "go hang", that is, not be regarded at all. No highbrow stuff, no responsibility for ...


1

"that direct espionage" targets "opinion" (probably, public opinion or popular sentiment) making it difficult for different, "bold, unorthodox views" to be heard and read. Everywhere now it is difficult to get adequate, far-reaching publicity for outspoken discussion of the way the world is going, and the political, economic ...


1

First of all, use "many" instead of "much", since questions is a countable noun. I'd also avoid using "more" twice. Finally while it does makes sense, it could be clearer with some reorganizing. I would write this as: There are many more questions that will reveal additional information about people when answered. ...


0

It means that 'you' in that song introduced the therapist for 'me', and she (the therapist) really helped me. In terms of structure, I guess that / the therapist (I found for you), she really helped. So the therapist=she. 'I found for you' modifies 'the therapist' as an adjective phrase.


0

Learning [to respect others] is important. The bracketed element, an infinitival clause, is not object but complement of the catenative verb "learning". Within the complement clause, the NP "others" is object of "respect". There are no other objects. Note that (with one minor exception) only NPs, not clauses, can be objects.


0

I would say short sleeved blouse, but apart from that the two descriptions are equivalent. A typical blouse is cut like a shirt, with buttons and a collar, and either long or short sleeves. I have one without sleeves; I call it a blouse because it buttons down the front. A T-shirt or a tank top (vest top in British English) is not a blouse because it is made ...


0

The expressions are very close. "Just by..." suggests that you are doing something to get that result. Bare "just..." suggests that you noticed the result without seeking it. The word "by" doesn't fit well into your example sentences, because they seem apt descriptions of something that happened, not something that one tried to ...


2

"̶F̶i̶r̶m̶s̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶w̶o̶r̶s̶e̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶c̶r̶e̶d̶i̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶f̶e̶r̶ ̶l̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶t̶r̶a̶d̶e̶ ̶c̶r̶e̶d̶i̶t̶.̶"̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶g̶r̶a̶m̶m̶a̶t̶i̶c̶a̶l̶l̶y̶ ̶c̶o̶r̶r̶e̶c̶t̶.̶ ̶H̶o̶w̶e̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶d̶o̶e̶s̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶n̶e̶c̶e̶s̶s̶a̶r̶i̶l̶y̶ ̶m̶e̶a̶n̶ ̶e̶x̶a̶c̶t̶l̶y̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶a̶m̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶.̶ F̶o̶r̶ ̶e̶x̶a̶m̶p̶l̶e̶,̶ ̶i̶f̶ ̶I̶ ̶s̶a̶i̶d̶ ̶"...


1

For a movie I would likely say something like "That scene went over my head". I _might use your "one after another" construction if talking about some comedian's routine. I don't like your second variant at all, it sounds far too passive, and also like the fault is somehow the joke's rather than with you as the listener.


0

Rewrite for explaining the meaning of after. The earliest copyist engraver who had worked in the style of Mantegna drawing had simply copied the lines that Mantegna made with his pen. They both precede the lines he made with his pen. VERB TENSE: "had worked" and "had copied" in the past perfect precede the verb made in the simple past. ...


Top 50 recent answers are included