I do not see how "meal" can possibly be a subject complement because the person paying is not a meal.
The analysis given by Swan strikes me as sensible: "pay for" is considered a transitive verb and can be put into the passive voice like any transitive verb even though it is a prepositional verb.
It is perhaps not a perfect example because you might make ...
When a noun is the direct object of the verb assume, most of the time the connotation of the verb is undertaking some role or task:
When the owner of the company died, he assumed the powers of CEO.
But for the meaning of assume as "take as true," a noun can serve as direct object:
I think it's a racism thing when you assume things about Ed.
This is ...
The first is correct. "Tell" is in the infinitive mood. And you are effectively saying:
Now let's hear Marco (to) tell his story, except that idiomatically the to is elided.
Your second example uses the indicative mood of "tell" - but the sentence already has an indicative main verb - hear.
First I would change the "bought a ticket" to "have a ticket" or "a ticket is needed". After all, you probably don't care who bought it, but only who has one when they get there :)
A friendly reminder would be "A ticket is needed for admission" (no ticket, you don't get in)
A more stern reminder would be "A ticket is required to get in" (like a teacher ...
All of those are acceptable. There are subtleties about when you would use each though.
These are not comprehensive or absolute, but below are examples of how each might be used.
I will give you some water. If you have some water in your possession.
I will get you some water. If you need to leave the person to retrieve some water.
I will ...
There are no nouns in your examples, only prefixes. Sometimes prefixes are hyphenated, sometimes not.
"Repurchase" is a word, so you can use that without a hyphen. Most words with the "re" prefix are not hyphenated (eg regain, rejoin, remarry etc).
"Post-process" seems to be a perfectly acceptable verb. It isn't the hyphen that makes it a verb, nor is "...
In English, we talk about businesses, and similar enterprises, “opening” each day rather than “beginning”. The reason for this is related to the idea that a business like a shop “opens” its doors to the public each morning, but the usage is the same for businesses that don’t interact with the public. So, for example:
The shop opens at 9am so I usually ...
Differentiate and distinguish share one synonymous meaning, but each word has other meanings that aren't synonymous.
For example, it's possible to use differentiate intransitively (example from Google) without a between structure:
the receptors are developed and differentiated into sense organs
but you can't substitute distinguish here.
Also, using ...
The correct way to use must is this, which is equivalent to saying had to stop:
During a tour of the factory, health and safety inspectors declared that the company must stop production until a series of tests were carried out.
Must have stopped would refer to a time further in the past when production actually or was believed to have actually stopped. ...
Neither of those are correct.
It would actually be phrased:
Are ECN470 and FIN470 the same course?
I.e. You need to use "are" for the plurality of the two course names, and then the singular "course".
It may seem counter-intuitive, but let's expand out the essential meaning to see what is singular and what is plural:
Are ECN470 and FIN470 two ...
Want and querer in Spanish work similarly.
Quiero hablar con ella = I want to talk to her.
Spanish infinitives end in -ar, -er, or -ir. English ones begin with to with a few exceptions. Using want like this is not one of them.
Can is a modal verb. Here's all the common English modals:
can could will would shall should may might
English likes to ...
As written, the statement implies that you had prior knowledge that something was happening in Libya, and you turned the TV on specifically to get more information.
If you were to say this instead (using '... and found out ...' as per Kate Bunting's suggestion in the comments):
"Last Sunday night I turned on the TV, and found out what was happening in ...
The verb 'damage' needs a direct object to be a part of a Predicative Verb in such a sentence. That is why 'damaging' is a predicative adjective here. A tense of the Predicative Verb is the Past Simple in the grammar construction with the linking verb 'be' here.
If you mean 'microwave' as the wave in the radiation spectre, I'd recommend you such phrase as 'microwave radiation.' A listener could disambiguate the meaning of the whole sentence after such slight change. This change makes it necessary to transform the sentence into a kind as follows: Microwave radiation produces rapid and homogeneous heating in the oven ...
You don't need to write a verb.
When you mark a letter "For the attention of Mr Jones", you are in effect saying:
This letter is for the attention of Mr Jones.
So, the verb is "is" (the present tense third-person singular of "to be"). But you don't need to write it.
English grammar rules are not always observed in instructions, or commands. You can ...
You are using a verb “it’s”. You are using 3rd person of verb "to be": is. That means that sentence is in present continuous. The correct answer is "it is snowing" you can also say “it’s a snowy day” because snowy is an adverb.
You have asked a question about licensing, i.e., which words (in this case secret) permit which grammatical constructs as complements (those structures that complete the meaning of the words). In this case, secret licenses the following
[1a] secret to-infinitive
[1b] secret prepositional phrase
Thus you can say
Linking verbs: Verbs that do not point to an action but join the subject and the subject subject complement in a sentence are known as linking verbs.
They are the main verb in the sentence.
They can be both transitive and intransitive verb.
Ex: Be , look, appear, grow, seem, sound, taste, turn are used as linking verbs.
Sentence: I am a teacher.
I : subject ...
Inversion of subject and verb (auxiliary) in a subordinate clause is a literary construction equivalent to "if".
were it to be followed
is a literary way of saying
if it were to be followed
There is no difference in meaning between them.
I also cannot find any difference in meaning between those and
if it were followed
In other contexts ...
'Were to' can be used as an if/then conditional in the present or future sense.
In this case 'were to' is separated by the subject 'it' (trend) and 'be followed' as it relates to the trend means that it would continue.
'Were it to be followed' means 'if the trend continues'
Here's a rephrasing to ...
"is" could be either a copula or an auxiliary. If we're describing the window's current state, "is" is a copula:
The front door is red. That window is stiff. This window is broken by children. The gate is squeaky.
If we're in the middle of a narrative, "is" is an auxiliary:
A mob approaches the building. Men nail a notice on the door. One window has ...
In your example, the phrase "ranging from $300 to $15000" is functioning as an adjective, modifying the noun "dog breeds".
You are correct that the "-ing" forms of verbs (when not part of a larger verb construction) generally function as either nouns or adjectives. When they are adjectives, they are called the "present participle". When they function as ...
The whole dispute seems to be just misunderstanding.
The paraphrase of the sentence along the lines of grammar, as grammarians know well, looks like that: "Did it take you a long time to wait for us yesterday?" - "Did you need to wait for us for a long time yesterday?".
How much revision did you need to do?
Did you need to talk to me before I ...
This is something of a "magic words" question. This means that you are asking for the words that people say in some situation. The fact is that (with a few exceptions) there are no magic words. Any communication is a dialogue. So it is vitally important that you consider not only what you say, but what the other person is saying, and respond to that ...