whichever uses to emphasize a lack of restriction in selecting one of a definite set of alternatives.
whatever uses to emphasize a lack of restriction in referring to anything or amount, no matter what.
To further confuse the issue, you could also say "down the road" or "up the road" or "up ahead." All of these expressions have exactly the same meaning. It has nothing to do with the altitude or hills along the road. No wonder English is nearly impossible to learn if you weren't born here!
Yes, "start" can be used and it makes sense in generic, every-day speech. However, from a technical point of view, that information is not very well defined.
It is one things that the motor starts rotating for any reason (t1), and it is another thing that the generator actually starts providing the nominal power characteristics (voltage, current, power, ...
to follow through: to continue something until it is completed.The city has raised the money for more teachers – now it has to follow through and hire them.
to go along: to agree or be willing to accept something.The president would not feel obligated to go along with a deal he didn't like.
which means both can be used in your ...
The "of" is not redundant in any of your sentences, because you can't remove it without changing the words.
Saying something is "of importance" is another way of saying it is important. You cannot say "of important", so your first example would have to change:
It is of the utmost importance
It is the most important.
The same goes for examples ...
It's natural and it's understandable from the context. Only is a tricky modifier and its placement can cause ambiguity. Here are the possible meanings depending on where the word appears in the sentence:
Only you seem to notice me.
(Everybody else ignores me.)
You only seem to notice me.
(You're pretending to notice me.)
You seem only to ...
Normally you would say buy if you want to communicate that you want to buy it, as opposed to just looking at it or trying it out.
If you say "I'll buy that backpack", you're telling the seller or clerk that you don't want to try it on. They may therefore ask you if you're sure you don't want to try it on first.
If there's no need to clarify it, like or ...
The movie is over, the play is over.
Meaning: the movie has come to an end, the play has come to an end.
The box of chocolates is finished. = All the chocolates have been eaten.
With regard to consuming chocolates from a box, one generally would not use "is over" because "is over" refers to an activity or thing occurring in time that has come to an end.
All are fine,
The difference between walking or running into a wall is the speed at which the collision occurs.
The difference between walking/running into a wall and bumping into a wall IMHO is the extent to which it happened. Walking/running into a wall denotes a full on collision, while bumping into it seems to indicate that the collision was but a ...
I'm sure you know the difference between walk and run - the difference is in speed. The end results of "walk into" and "run into" may be the same, but the circumstances leading to your collision are different. They also both infer that you were at fault - because you were walking or running.
"Bumped into" is fine too, but in my experience, it more often ...
As FumbleFingers already implied,
Why aren't you coming from here?
simply isn't normal usage, in any context that I can think of.
You've already said "So one of the children wants to say "Why aren't you coming this way?" " which is perfectly normal and understandable, and probably the most common way of saying something like this. Both of your follow-...
"Knock down" usually only refers to monetary transactions, for example:
I knocked him down on price.
"Talk down" has a much wider usage and could refer to persuading anyone to "come down" from a physical place, a mental position or standpoint. So you could use it for knocking down a price, but for other things too.
I talked him down on price
I'll = I will
I'd = I would
It's as simple as that. In your two examples, I'd is more natural. "I'm busy right now, but I'd love to chat if we could meet later." "OK, I'll be in the coffee bar at 10.30."
“I would” refers either to something theoretical/uncertain:
I’d love to be a millionaire
I’d love to have coffee with you on Thursday
“I will” implies certainty:
I will love this movie because I liked all previous movies by this actor
But if you switch out the word “love” with something else it opens up more use cases. Let’s take a different ...
You need to think what you are predicating it of.
If you are talking about short, it is the group that is short, not the students that are late (or even the group of late students), so you can say:
We are four students short (or "We are short of four students"),
but you can't say that the students are short with that meaning.
The same for less, except ...
4 students are missing.
This one is grammatically fine.
4 students are short.
This is describing the students as short (opposite of tall), not describing the number of students as short. You could say "We are 4 students short [of the expected number]".
4 students are less.
Less than what? No, that can't be used. You could say "We have 4 ...
I think the first one sounds somewhat natural, but it's a poor sentence.
I need to understand this concept from Ms. Brown.
is leaving out the method in which you will receive your understanding.
It's a short way of saying something like:
I need to understand this concept from the explanation that Ms. Brown will give.
But this sentence is quite wordy,...
Either way is correct. It's really just a matter of preference.
To me, it sounds better to say
X comes first.
because it doesn't mention the other option, and might be a bit more emphasizing. But then again, it's a matter of preference.
wherever and whenever you want
This is not a sentence but a noun phrase, typically occurring in 'free choice' relative contructions. The crucial point is that the ever component marks the phrase as non-referential: there is no reference to any particular place or time. For example:
You can go whenever and wherever you want
can be glossed as "You can go ...
Virginia Tufte in her book Artful Sentences, talks about "inverted" and "initial" appositives, as in "A lonely boy, Coleridge retreated into books...and fed his mind with adventures so wild and fancies so morbid that he often feared the coming of the night" so I'm not convinced that appositives "Always come AFTER the noun."
What she doesn't say, but I ...