that refers back to effect, and perhaps intended is a participle phrase which modifies that. The meaning is therefore
that perhaps intended -> the effect that is perhaps intended.
In my opinion, it is an unnecessarily complex construction... but when it follows an obscure word like perlocutionary, it's probably not reasonable to expect clear writing.
This construction is regarded as informal. It actually means, "must have said it." have to is almost the same as must. If said in the past, it'll be, "had to have said it." which also expresses the certainty of the speaker.
In this context, it means "that one", "that specific road".
"Each one (that is, each person) must find that (specific road) which works."
Sorry this is a short post, it's all I can find to say about it.
Well maybe you can talk to me; use voice message.
would be an instruction to use a voice message rather than some other method.
Well maybe you can talk to me using voice messages.
would be a description of a possible action. Assuming that a command is not intended, the first sentience cannot be correct. The present tense form of the verb "use" ...
There was a chill in the air, and we were all of us tired.
That is a funny way to put it. So in a non-native speaker it would be seen as wrong or awkward. In literature it would be presumed to have been done on possible and would be almost poetic.
It would be great if you would not be here around for a while.
No, that is not correct. First of all let's switch two words:
It would be great if you would not be around here for a while.
That is doable but awkward. Better would be:
It would be great if you would not hang around here for a while.
The problem is that the verb 'be' is not usually seen as ...
It is the constraint that induced cooperation and led to negotiation and adjustment. It may not make a big difference, since the referendum became the constraint, but I think that links syntactically to the nearest preceding noun.
that is a relative pronoun: it connects together two clauses, and represents a noun in the main clause buy acting as the subject of object pronoun in the subordinate clause.
In this particular sentence, the subordinate clause comes in two parts, linked by and, and that represents referendum (which is also an institutional constraint) as the subject of the ...
What you've written conveys your meaning. I don't think you need the particular phrase you ask for. I might say it a little differently, perhaps
The Effective Altruism movement has had substantial impact even
though it is little known.
I hope your surrounding text describes how that impact came about, given that the movement is unknown. What was the ...
Additional context from Great Expectations:
It was a dirty place enough, and I dare say not unknown to smuggling adventurers; but there was a good fire in the kitchen, and there were eggs and bacon to eat, and various liquors to drink
To me, it looks like unusual rephrasing of "a dirty enough place," meaning it was fairly dirty but not very dirty....
The correct way to say it is
I don't cook sushi because i got told off the first time i tried.
"Got" is a common daily-English usage in these cases. It means the same thing as using "was". While fine in daily speech, it would not do in formal writing or a formal presentation.
So you can use 'got' or 'was' it does not really ...
Later on, when I will have more experience as a Salesperson
It's not necessary or usual to include "will".
I'm giving an answer because others seem to be answering in the comments which is not in accordance with the SE rules. Giving an actual answer allows up-votes, down-votes and allows the OP to accept an answer if desired.
It is fine, though I would not put a comma in it.
This kind of inversion, which is rather literary, is required when a negative polarity item is brought to the front of the clause, eg Never, Scarcely, Only (introducing a phrase or a clause), On no account, etc.
Think of it like this:
[All [that was left]] was [a triangular piece of metal].
"All that was left" is a noun phrase, and is the subject of the main clause. "Was" is the verb of the main clause, and "a triangular piece of metal" is the complement of the verb.
"That was left" is a relative clause (a subordinate clause ...
There are a couple of problems with B. The conjuction "but" is used to join two independent clauses together. In B the first clause starts with "though" which is a subordinating conjunction. There is nothing for it to be subordinate to.
If you removed "Though"
All players do play hard, but when the captain is motivated, they ...
All that was left was a triangular piece of metal.
All is a subject(S) and
was is a finite verb (real verb)
"that was left" a relative pronoun clause which has "All" as an antecedent.
In this relative clause(that was left), "that" is a subject and it is called "nominative or subjective case of relative pronoun"; here ...
First, the meaning in less poetic diction is “Ignore the inevitability that winter’s cold will come.” I suspect that you are correct that technically it means “Let change come,” but we really have no choice in the matter: it will come with or without our consent.
It is used in part to maintain the meter and in part to parallel the imperatives in the first ...
This is an outdated use of "nor". In modern English, we use it as a negative form of "or". When giving options in the positive, we use 'either/or', when speaking in the negative we use 'neither/nor'.
However, in earlier forms of English, 'nor' meant 'and not', which is not so far from its modern use anyway. So, your line in this ...
The nor is attached to the uninspired to make a double negative, not the obeyed. This is made clear from the preceding line:
The voice divine confess’d the warlike maid,
Here, "confessed" is used in an archaic sense, meaning "revealed". The identity of the warlike maid (Pallas, or Athena) is revealed by her divine voice.
Ulysses is ...
When "urge" is used as a transitive verb, the object is usually a person that you are trying to persuade.
Your 4th sentence is a good example of this: "him" is the object of the transitive verb, and the prepositional phrase in the rest of the sentence describes what you are persuading him to do.
Your 1st sentence is incorrect, because the ...
This is a sentence with a verb (teach), a direct object (what is being taught) and an indirect object (who it is being taught to). Because it's a passive form, the indirect object (the student) has become the subject of the sentence. The thing which is being taught (being polite) is still the direct object.
If you're asking about the structure of teach to be ...
Here are my explanations:
Q1. What's the difference between "to" and "towards"?
The meaning of "towards" is "in the direction of" according to the dictionary. So it could be used like "He is running towards the car" which means "He is running in the direction of the car". Whereas "to" ...
In US usage at least the form
For stars, engaging in conflicts likely harms their reputation
is perfectly acceptable and not uncommon. It may be considered a reduced form of
For stars, engaging in conflicts IS likely TO harm their reputation.
But I don't actually think so. The word "likely " here functions as an adverb, modifying "harms&...