> a. She liked it that her friends boasted about her. b. She liked that her friends boasted about her.
This answer suggests that a) is technically ungrammatical, and it needs a comma (i.e. turning it into two clauses, claiming the use of appositive) to make it grammatical.
> She liked it, that her friends boasted about her.
If the suggestion (or assertion) is correct, all speakers (particularly well-educated ones) will always say "She liked it [pause] that ..."
A note on "whenever you use since in a sentence like this, English simply forces you to use the perfect tense instead of the simple one": though it's good advice in general, it's not entirely correct. For example, Macmillan Dictionary has this: "Sometimes the present simple or past simple is used in the main clause: ♦ It’s over twenty years since we last met." Having said that, I agree that it's a good idea for learners to stick with using the perfect tense when using since. — Damkerng T.58 secs ago
I am not able to comprehend the meaning of the sentence:
By what inconceivable art has a
means been found of making men free by making them subject; of
using in the service of the State the properties, the persons and
even the lives of all its members, without constraining a...
> By what inconceivable art has a means been found of making men free by making them subject; of using in the service of the State the properties, the persons and even the lives of all its members, without constraining and without consulting them; of confining their will by their own admission; of overcoming their refusal by that consent, and forcing them to punish themselves, when they act against their own will?
> --The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right, plus Discourses by Jean-Jacques Rousseau
@DamkerngT. In that to/for question, OP replied...
So, per PEU, you would change all of them from for -ing to to infinitive? I could see this, especially if the sentences are expressing purpose. But what if we do not want to express the subject I's purpose/reason/aim/etc, but we want to express the function of the thing purchased? Can we still not say for + -ing? Ex I bought a new shelf displaying my DVDs. (Which seems to take us back to Sentence 1.) I like your answer. I am not entirely convinced. — pazzo7 hours ago
I am not sure how to answer that question, but it is a very good point he arose. So I thought a little bit, and wrote this -
@pazzo Thanks. I don't know if not following what PEU recommended it's ungrammatical or not, because PEU itself said that "it's more common". So from there we can draw some conclusion: that in some cases (cases like your example sentences) are not ungrammatical, but may be they are less common. The first sentence in Cambridge uses for construction even when the subject is a human. That is similar to your first sentence. I need something for storing CDs. - The purpose of something is store CDs, and something is definitely not human, (cont...) — Man_From_India10 mins ago
(cont...) so it's justified that for construction is used. But if we see it from the point of view of the subject to construction is preferred. So it's basically a choice, as far as I see it. That's why in COCA there are few hits for soap for washing compared to soap to wash. The only purpose of soap is washing, so both construction can be okay. But in your sentence #1, though I still believe it's also acceptable, it's like this He purchased X X -> a NP -> a Jet for traveling. For construction is possible. At the same time to construction is also possible. (cont...) — Man_From_India6 mins ago
(cont...) but when you specify the destination and starting point of the jet, it's a bit unusual. I mean the Jet can travel even beyond that. So in that particular case it's not wise to see from the jet's perspective. Because Jet can travel anywhere. So it's better to see from the human subject's perspective. (I don't know if these comments does at all make sense, but that is what I think. I didn't find any other reference about this topic.) — Man_From_India3 mins ago
I don't know if what I said is at all correct. But that is what I can think of. Please share your views. Thanks.
I think I bought a new shelf displaying my DVDs is awkward because the verb is buy. It's a new thing. We didn't have it yet before the buying, so displaying sounds a little weird.
I thought that you basically insisted on the explanation given by PEU, and added this: but when you specify the destination and starting point of the jet, it's a bit unusual, which is correct, I think.
Yes...I can't remember which question, but we indeed were one day discussing about the increasing typos in English Daily, not only in Indian daily but in dailies elsewhere. Even I think The Guardian was in that list.
> He also told the undercover federal worker that he planned to buy a semi-automatic rifle on June 20 at a local gun show so he could carry out his murderous plan, according to the criminal complaint.
@Ahmad Metaphorically speaking (various actions in boxing for sentences): short sentences are like hooks, long sentences are like jabs and uppercuts, transitional parts are like steps. A fighter may jab, hook, jab, hook, step, hook, hook, hook. A boxer may jab, jab, jab, uppercut, step, jab, step, uppercut, jab, jab, jab, hook, step, jab, jab, jab. An experienced boxer (similar to pazzo's comment) would know when he should do what. — Damkerng T.24 secs ago
@Damkerng: I'm sure OP's specific example is a simple typo, but you have to be careful about identifying all such constructions as "ungrammatical". It would be hard to argue with When he awoke to the sound of her raucous snoring, the girl who singing in the club last night had seemed so alluring now just disgusted him. (On syntactic grounds, at least - I don't defend either the characters or their behaviour! :) — FumbleFingers3 mins ago
Interesting! -- (scratching head)
I think I like whose better, but maybe it's debatable.
If someone is depressed you can say, "We knew about his depression." How about the feeling of meaninglessness? I think you can't say, "We knew about his meaninglessness" (since it's not a state or condition).
I am not able to comprehend the meaning of the sentence:
By what inconceivable art has a
means been found of making men free by making them subject; of
using in the service of the State the properties, the persons and
even the lives of all its members, without constraining a...
If someone is depressed you can say, "We knew about his depression." How about the feeling of meaninglessness? I think you can't say, "We knew about his meaninglessness" (since it's not a state or condition).
Language Overflow
Language Overflow