English Language Learners

@DamkerngT. When I saw that, I thought there were mixed messages. First of all, Maleficent was vulnerable to losing her virginity, and so, since what had happened was that her boyfriend, instead of taking her virginity (which she probably would have wanted to happen), stole her wings for the King. So, there was two things for her to feel bad about.

Hi @DamkerngT.!

She was probably also pissed and disappointed that her vulnerable body was not enough of an inducement to the guy. He only took her wings. -- Me, I'd have taken both. :)

Ahh

@F.E. Bravo, F.E.! Stoutly abjure the voiceover!

12:05 AM

@StoneyB Voice-overs are hard to do. Even when they are decent, many fans still don't like them.

VO is the writer's confession of defeat.

@StoneyB Yes! I completely agree!

Voice-over cheapens the overall experience of the movie's story.

It treats the audience like children, whose minds are too feeble to understand and experience a full story.

It denies the audience the opportunity of entering into a dialogue.

I would've really enjoyed watching Maleficent do all those terrible things as she becomes bitter.

And then watched as she slowly, unknowing, is getting transformed by her interaction with Aurora.

Is this a movie worth watching? (I only see about two movies a year these days, so I'm picky.)

12:09 AM

Then that would've made that scene when Maleficent fails in removing the curse so much more powerful.

@DamkerngT. I actually just popped in to congratulate you on the Very Superior answer to Listenever's question about p/b.

@StoneyB But that answer wasn't mine. It's jimsug's. :D

jimsug's spectrogram looks really ~~good~~ great.

Oh, heavens, I am wrapt in embarassment. I thought it was yours ... I didn't even look at the sig. ... but yes, the graphics were very intelligible. I was going to ask what software you used - I only have Audition, which isn't really designed for that.

It's hard to do the same thing with the /l/ sound, though. Liquid sounds are hard to read in spectrogram.

(Though I think I know a few tricks to read the difference; but /l/ and /r/ sounds are tricky and they both have a lot of variations.)

@StoneyB I think the most popular one is perhaps Praat. However, I like WaveSurfer better.

(I mentioned them just in case you might want to do that kind of thing yourself sometimes. It could be fun. :-)

Better graphics or better 'features' or easier to use?

12:19 AM

It's easier to use. If it were an essay, it would be a very straightforward one.

The only downside of WaveSurfer (that I can think of) is its save-spectrogram-to-image isn't quite good. I usually use another program as a sidekick to make a screenshot, if I want to have one. (I think this is mainly the reason why Praat is more popular among those linguists who work with sounds. Praat has a making-a-ready-to-print-spectrogram feature, iirc.)

My guess is jimsug used Praat to produce the images in that answer.

I will ask jimsug when I meet jimsug. jimsug pops up in here often enough.

Oh, I think I can ask it right away. The chat room will take care the rest. @jimsug I guessed that you used Praat to produce the spectrogram and waveform images in that p-b sounds question. Did I guess right? :-)

hello

@Bobthezealot Hello!

@DamkerngT. hello

Does either of these, or any software, allow you to manipulate the image? I've often thought it would be very handy in discussing prosody to work with an interlinear image showing the text and immediately above (or beneath) it, in a very narrow band (just one line deep), the rise and fall of amplitude and pitch [would that be F0?] - can you do that?

hi everyone

12:30 AM

A pleasure to make your acquaintance ... zealous for what? Or are you reviving the Judaean revolutionary movement? :)

how's everyone doing

^o^

I'm doing some things adequately and shuffling off the others.

@StoneyB I'm not sure about Praat (it might). WaveSurfer doesn't provide such a feature, but it comes with a capability that allows us to stack several things (and aligned properly), such as F0, spectrogram, etc. neatly. And it has a data pane, where you can prepare data manually outside and edit the data inside the program. In any case, I think Praat is better for more advanced usages. And for really advanced usages, you might need some helps from other graphic editors.

(WaveSurfer comes with a decent pitch tracker.)

@DamkerngT. wanta here more about Vex Robotics

12:36 AM

whats that

@Bobthezealot Ahh... sorry, I was busy trying to make an example of spectrogram.

cool

should I tell you something about Vex?

@StoneyB That's how my typical settings would look like. From top to bottom, a spectrogram pane, a waveform pane, a pitch tracking pane, and a label pane. The sound clip was actually taken from Listenever's question (the one about the /l/ sound). I just made a few labels for the syllables: law, less, ness.

@Bobthezealot Is it another secret?

no

maybe i told this already

Ooh .. If it can be set to output to a consistent scale I could build a Photoshop macro to manipulate it ...

12:40 AM

I am going to be a coach this year for the highrise game and lead a team

@Bobthezealot Oh, congratulations!

@Bobthezealot That's really something!

yay

I will go away and play with this now .. and look for WaveSurfer. As you were!

You can find WaveSurfer on SourceForge.net, I think.

sourceforge.net/projects/wavesurfer/files/wavesurfer/1.8.8p4

but there's a problem this year

12:45 AM

@Bobthezealot What is the problem?

our coach we had for last year's son is making his own team and probably win us

Haha! That sounds like a real challenge!

no!!!

hello? anyone here?

1:01 AM

I'm back. I just saw your answer. :)

ok

I think 75% of your answer is in the OP's words.

:)

lol

yup

do you think it's correct

nods

I think your idea sounds about right. — Damkerng T. 2 mins ago

thanks

can you please upvote me?

thanks

1:07 AM

I just did. Usually we should explain a bit more. (Why is a very important part for learners.) However, I don't see how to add much more that what the OP said. (I think it's probably off-topic, too, because they can look up the word nurture in dictionaries.)

Btw, I have to AFK. See you later.

bye

: (

1:18 AM

hi?

5:48 AM

. . . gnar . . . chomp . . .

strolling around the room...

. . . yawwwwwwn . . .

In ELL, there is a thread about: ""Why teamwork and ideas win/wins/won over smarts" -- How come nobody mentioned that the example isn't a sentence?

That thread is 10 days old.

6:05 AM

You mean this one, I think: ell.stackexchange.com/q/24764/3281

I stepped aside because someone had answered the question before I could even have a chance to comment anything. :)

Yup. :)

But anyhow . . . time for tiger nap . . . sneaks away

Anonymous

8:30 AM

2

Q: Win, Wins, or Won?

Is this grammar correct? "Why condition1 and condition2 wins over condition3." Example: "Why teamwork and ideas wins over smarts". I'm not sure the proper way to form the tense/aspect for "win". I'm saying this has already happened, but it will happen again. For example, we won the ...

Q: If you want to keep data in a plain text, then you should have to remove HTML markup from the data string

10:46 AM

1

If you want to keep data in a plain text, then you should have to remove HTML markup from the data string. When I checked the above sentence in grammar checking tool, it showed an article mistake. Can anyone explain this article mistake?

definite-article

---<\br>This question was closed while I was writing an answer and now I can't post it. Is there a way to save the answer in case the question is reopened?

---</br> I can see two article mistakes in this sentence:

> If you want to keep data in **<strike>a</strike>** plain text, then you should have to remove **the** HTML markup from the data string.

It is a mistake to precede the expression **plain text** with the article **a**, because *plain text* in this context is an uncountable noun that means a format to store a text in an unencrypted form. In fact, *plain text* is an adjetival phrase, that is a phrase acting as an adjective.

It can also be argued that the article *the* is missing in **the HTML markup from the data string**. The artic…

Anonymous

11:46 AM

@Nico Put it in a text file and save it to your hard drive.

Anonymous

@Nico I write the word plaintext as a single orthographic word. Some people write it with a space, too, and that's also okay.

Anonymous

@Nico The article isn't necessary. Actually, I like it better without it, but even better would be using the word any instead.

Anonymous

> If you want to keep data in plaintext, you should remove any HTML markup it contains.

Anonymous

Something like that, maybe.

12:17 PM

@snailboat To me, articles are tricky! One of the rules of thumb I use is that if the noun has an adjunct then the noun is actually begging for a determiner of some kind: "the HTML markup", "all the HTML markup", "any HTML markup"...

12:28 PM

I'm cheating. I'm using the chat room as a backup for this answer }:>

I can see two article mistakes in this sentence:

> If you want to keep data in **<strike>a</strike>** plain text, then you **<strike>should</strike>** have to remove **the** HTML markup from the data string.

It is a mistake to precede the expression **plain text** with the article **a**, because *plain text* in this context is an uncountable noun that means a format to store a text in an unencrypted form. In fact, *plain text* is an adjetival phrase, that is a phrase acting as an adjective.

It can also be argued that the article *the* is missing in **the HTML markup from the data string*…

I've updated to answer to comment on the collocation of "should" and "have to".

Anonymous

12:46 PM

@Nico Oh, that's fine, too! I was reading your messages from top to bottom, so I responded to that one before I read the next

Anonymous

1:07 PM

@Nico I think the is wrong (infelicitous = grammatical but inappropriate in context), though.

Anonymous

The beginning of the sentence sounds like you're talking about data in general.

Anonymous

If you want to keep data in plaintext, … ← Here, we are making a generalization, like "If you want to lose weight, you should eat more donuts"

Anonymous

, then you should remove the HTML markup　←　What HTML markup? I can't identify any HTML markup. The data mentioned so far is only data in general. It hasn't been made specific. I don't know that it contains any HTML markup.

Anonymous

Since I, the listener, can't identify what HTML markup you're talking about, it makes me ask: "The HTML markup? What HTML markup?"

Anonymous

The is a signal to the listener that they can identify what the noun phrase refers to.

Anonymous

1:09 PM

It's a pragmatic signal. It's a fairly weak signal, too. But in this case, I don't think its requirements are met.

Anonymous

Since it's a pragmatic signal, this could change depending on the surrounding context.

Anonymous

It's possible the could work. But from what I have, it doesn't look like it.

Anonymous

I need to know that there is HTML markup in the data, and right now I don't know that. All I know is "data" in general, which may or may not contain HTML markup.

Anonymous

That's why any seems appropriate to me.

By the same argument, the adjunct "from the data string" should be removed too. Oh! "from the data string" is actually complementing the verb!

Anonymous

1:11 PM

It works whether or not there's HTML markup present. That's appropriate for a generalization.

Anonymous

Did you notice in my version I wrote "any HTML markup it contains"? :-)

yes

I think "any" works best

Anonymous

So I replaced "from the data string" with "it contains"

Anonymous

Where it = "data"

Anonymous

But there, since you've already mentioned data, you could say the data to refer back to it instead of it, if you wanted to be explicit. The listener can identify the data--it's the same data mentioned in the first half of the sentence.

1:13 PM

> If you want to keep data in plain text, then you have to remove from the data string any HTML markup.

Anonymous

remove from the data any HTML markup seems like an unnatural word order to me.

If you want to keep data in plain text, then you have to remove [any] HTML markup.

Somehow, without [any], it doesn't sound right to my ear.

Anonymous

Without any, it becomes false unless further context supplies the additional information "all data in this context contains HTML markup"

@snailboat It is an unnatural order. I was testing whether "from..." is complementing the verb.

> *If you want to keep these data in plain text, then you have to remove HTML markup.

still doens't sound right without "the"

> *If you want to keep in plaintext these data that contains HTML markup, then you have to remove HTML markup.

Anonymous

@Nico Plural data is strange. Acceptable, but strange.

Anonymous

1:20 PM

I would never change someone's singular data to plural data.

sorry, it's a pedantic habit from academia.

Anonymous

I would be willing to leave someone's plural data alone, though.

Anonymous

Singular data is definitely the superior choice in 2014, though.

Some older academics look down on me each time I let a "singular data" slip.

Could you come up with an example where "remove HTML markup" sounds right?

> HTML markup is an uncountable noun

Anonymous

@Nico That's right, it is.

1:27 PM

> Part of the process is to remove HTML markup

Anonymous

@Nico That's difficult, because you have to presuppose to the listener that there's HTML markup without meeting the definiteness requirements

Anonymous

However, there is another option

Anonymous

> If you want to keep these data in plaintext, then you have to remove HTML markup, if [any is] present.

Anonymous

Not a great sentence, but :-)

I think the fact the Spanish is my L1, makes me feel "remove HTML markup" is missing a determiner. Oh, I'll have to get used to.

Anonymous

1:29 PM

Well, I'm not a big fan of "remove HTML markup", myself.

Anonymous

My favorite is any :-)

:)

Thx for the patience to go through this sentence with me.

Anonymous

I enjoy talking about English.

Me too!

Anonymous

Hey, tell me about Spanish.

Anonymous

1:32 PM

Yo no comprendo　←　"I don't understand", right?

Anonymous

There's no equivalent of "do" because you can put "no" in directly, without needing to attach it to an auxiliary verb like in English, right?

That's correct, although I would say "Yo no entiendo" or just "No entiendo".

Anonymous

Yo no entiendo!

Anonymous

Yo no comprendo o no entiendo…

Also since this verb is usually transitive, I would say "No lo entiendo" (I don't understand it) or "No te entiendo" (I don't understand you).

Anonymous

1:34 PM

Ooh, that's helpful

"Comprender" is fine, but it sounds a bit more formal than "entender".

You can start the sentence with "yo", but it's not necessary unless you want to stress that it is "yo" and not someone else who doesn't understand.

Anonymous

Yeah, I should try to remember to leave out my yos :-)

Anonymous

(I mean, except when I shouldn't!)

When was the last time you studied Spanish?

Anonymous

Hmm. I was 11 or 12, probably.

1:38 PM

I'm impressed! I studied French 10 years ago and now it is so rusty!!!

Anonymous

1:51 PM

Oh, my Spanish is beyond rusty :-)

Well, pronouns in Spanish aren't easy, specially accusative and dative pronouns.

Anonymous

@Nico I guess because Spanish has a lot of different verb forms, it makes sense dropping subject pronouns a lot of the time

Anonymous

Since the information is contained in the verb form, why repeat it unnecessarily? :-)

Anonymous

No lo puedo comprender ← "I can't understand it/him"?

I think that's the reason, but we have "reflexive verbs", like "llamarse", "lavarse", where I think their only contribution is to slightly change the meaning of the original verb.

@snailboat That's a bit more complicated to explicar.

In general in Spanish accusative goes without a preposition:

Anonymous

2:08 PM

@Nico But you can still omit the subject there, right? Just not the reflexive object? Yo me llamo Snailboat!

Yo no entiendo este problema = I don't understand this problem

but if the accusative is a person we add the preposition "a"

Anonymous

Entender makes me think of French entendre, but that means something different :-)

Yo no entiendo a Maria = I don't understand Mary

Anonymous

I should start using it

Anonymous

Ooh

2:09 PM

This makes it confusing, because it looks like dative!

Anonymous

It does

In the female case is fine, because:

- the female accusative pronoun is "la"

- the female dative pronoun is "le"

But in the male case:

- the male accusative , we can use either "lo" or "le"
- the male dative pronoun is "le"

All these similarities has caused that in some regions of Spain "le", "lo" and "la" are used when it is not supposed to.

... I'm afraid I'm making this explanation too confusing ...

Basically, I wanted to justify that, you can hear:

I don't understand him = No le entiendo = No lo entiendo

Anonymous

And there's no distinction between lo and le? They're in free variation?

Anonymous

(For the male case)

We have a Royal Academy that prescribes what uses in Spanish are acceptable. They say: if the accusative is a person you can use either "le" or "lo", if it isn't a person only "lo" is acceptable. For the dative, only "le" is acceptable.

Anonymous

2:20 PM

Ah! I see.

Anonymous

That is complicated. :-)

The motto of this academy is "Limpia, fija y da esplendor" (it cleans, sets and casts splendour) -- it sounds like the motto for washing-machine! :p

Anonymous

Ha

How different to the actitude the English have about their language!

Hi everyone!

2:25 PM

Hi

@Nico Do you still want to reopen that question?

It looks much better, mostly because you changed the word "correct" to "explain". :)

@Nico Oh, that motto sounds nice to me!

@DamkerngT. I know. I understand why it was closed, but I thought it cuold be rescued to discuss the use of articles. But now, after talking with snailboat, I feel that that sentence has so many things wrong that it wouldn't make a good question: "a plain text", "remove HTML markup", "should have to"...

Certainly, I would have to change what my answer says about "remove html markup"..

Can any one correct this statement......... Tomekia, I have checked the information for you & see that the information regarding the dispute is administered by your plan carrier.

Perhaps seen.

And was.

I'm not sure about plan carrier, though.

@Kabir101 What do you mean "by the information is administered by the carrier"?

2:32 PM

> If you want to keep data in a plain text, then you should have to remove HTML markup from the data string.

I'm not even sure if the OP really wanted to say that.

Perhaps...

> To keep data in plain text, (you should) remove HTML markup from it (the data).

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. That makes it sound like removing the HTML markup will cause it to be in plaintext.

nods -- The word data is really tricky. Oh, I actually wanted to parenthesize it.

Carrier is the plan provider who takes care of the disputes.

@Kabir101 Do you mean the carrier handles the complain, not just the information?

If the plan carrier takes care of the disputes, then is should be okay.

2:41 PM

@Kabir101 I gotta go for a while. Here's an alternative, but I'm not sure it fits your context:

No problem, but thanks.

> Tomekia, I have checked the information for you. However, note that the dispute is being handled by your plan carrier.

Can you put your thoughts here too...........Eric, the 2-3 weeks is from the date your spouse get approved from Dependent Verification Team.

Is "the 2-3 weeks" something mentioned earlier in the context?

Also, I can't make sense the tense of get.

I also think by is better than from.

2:58 PM

Even I...

I started auditing these chats.

Hah! I haven't thought that chats would need any auditing. Grammatically, I mean.

Nope, it is not mentioned anywhere above.

I know, anyone could think like that.

However, that's my work.

@Kabir101 Then it's a strange use of the. Perhaps I don't understand what the sentence was meant.

Anonymous

Yeah? What have you discovered in your audits? :-)

I think "The" should not be there and 'get' should be 'got'.

Grammar and customer service skills.

3:04 PM

> Eric, it's 2-3 weeks from the date your spouse got approved by Dependent Verification Team.

I'm still not really sure if that is what was intended.

Now, that's make more sense.

I guess, you are right, Damkerng.

Would you mind looking at this too: Therefore, in order to get this resolved you need to call your Medical Plan Carrier at- 1-866-705-9767 & they will provide you with the information.

It sounds a little too direct, I think.

Maybe, you will need or you should can soften it a bit.

Anonymous

@Kabir101 "That makes more sense"

3:46 PM

> It's no use expecting Bany to turn up. He will have forgotten by now.

I don't know why, but it feels very BrE to me. Perhaps because of the will.

and the use of the perfect aspect.

nods

It sounds odd to me, but not odd enough for me to mark it ungrammatical (though, again, it might be ungrammatical), so I guess it's BrE. :)

but I would say "It is of no use ..."

Hmm... that part (It's no use) sounds fine to me.

"It's of no use" would strike me as odd.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Is that a real quote?

3:51 PM

@snailboat It was from ZZ's comment.

ell.stackexchange.com/questions/23363/…

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's of no use is possible but less common.

Anonymous

Uncontracted will there seems unusual. You wouldn't normally leave it uncontracted unless you were stressing it, which doesn't seem appropriate here

@snailboat Another difference between dialects?

Anonymous

And they just used a contraction and informal phrase earlier in the sentence, so there's no indication that the author is trying to be hyper-formal by using uncontracted auxiliaries

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It's possible but less common in both BrE and AmE.

3:53 PM

Ah, thanks!

Anonymous

Anyway, the original seems grammatical to me. I just expect "He'll" instead of "He will", is all.

Anonymous

A little thing. :-)

nods

My first choice for the modal verb there is probably must.

Anonymous

I think that expresses something different.

I couldn't think of the difference.

Anonymous

3:57 PM

Oh god, you're going to make me explain modality again? :-)

(must also sounds BrE to me too, even though I prefer it myself.)

"will" indicate is in the future?

@snailboat Ah, that wasn't my intention. :)

Anonymous

Phew!

Anonymous

I've weaseled out of it.

3:59 PM

@Nico I think this will expresses a firm belief or speculation.

he'll have forgotten (it hasn't happen yet)

he must've forgotten (he has forgotten already)

Anonymous

@Nico That is only one possible meaning.

I use must to express my speculation when I'm rather sure too.

Anonymous

And in this case, it's ruled out because of by now

@snailboat True.

4:02 PM

Ah! Does this will express habituality (of this he)?

> he'll have forgotten by now
> he must've forgotten by now

"must" sounds more certain than "will"

I think that is it!

@Nico nods

And I think will (or 'll) sounds more habitual too.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. No, epistemic modality, I think

Anonymous

That is, if you compare it to "He's forgotten by now", which expresses the speaker's knowledge of his forgetting, the version with will is less certain.

So it doesn't really have to be about the speaker knowing that this he usually forgets this kind of thing?

Anonymous

4:09 PM

You can utter the will version even if you don't know for a fact that it's true, as long as you believe it's fairly likely

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. The sentence doesn't contain that information. It could be a possible implicature

Anonymous

It depends on context.

Anonymous

For example

Anonymous

"He drank the forgetting potion an hour ago. He'll have forgotten by now."

Anonymous

That doesn't express a habit of his.

4:10 PM

nods -- Maybe this will is about as certain as a might. Does that make sense?

Anonymous

I think will is more certain than might.

But less than must.

Anonymous

Probably less certain than must.

Anonymous

There's no strict hierarchy, but…

Anonymous

Apr 12 at 9:39, by snailboat

@ZhanlongZheng Your options for expressing uncertainty include: (no modal) > must > will > would > should > may > might

4:12 PM

Oh!

nods -- Thanks a lot!

@DamkerngT., after having tricked @snailboat into talking about modal verbs, I think she deserves a big lettuce leaf as a present!

Anonymous

Haha, thank you! :-)

Argh! What have I done?! :)

[a big lettuce leaf]

Anonymous

Yay!

Anonymous

Oh, even better!

4:14 PM

Hee.

Anonymous

The list above is the order of certainty I came up with. In some cases it might not be exactly that order, and in some cases an epistemic reading may not be available. There are also other possibilities for expressing uncertainty

I think we can add could at the end of the list. :)

I wouldn't know where to put "would" in that list.

could have been is featured on ELL now.

Anonymous

Can has an epistemic reading, but typically only in non-affirmative contexts (questions and negatives)

4:18 PM

> he would've forgotten by now
> he should've forgotten by now

Anonymous

The same is true of need, though it's less common

Hmm... he should've forgotten by now sounds a little odd to me.

Anonymous

And you can use adverbs and such: surely, certainly, possibly, maybe, perhaps, necessarily

@snailboat Ah, don't forget my favorite: probably

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. It sounds possible

4:20 PM

@DamkerngT. It sounds like an expression of obligation in that sentence

Anonymous

"That should work." [I'm not really sure.] "That ought to work." [I'm not really sure.]

OK, obligation is not the right word, it sounds more like an expectation.

Anonymous

@Nico Much like with will.

I think he should've forgotten makes the forgetting sound like something he should do.

Anonymous

@DamkerngT. Oops, you used a circular definition! ;-)

Anonymous

4:23 PM

But I understand.

Oh! That's true!

Anonymous

(Not technically circular, since both shoulds were in different syntactic contexts, which suggests different sets of possible readings.)

I can't be wrong with a circular definition, can I? :)

Anonymous

1. He should've forgotten by now.　←　Deontic reading (forgetting is expected of him)
2. He should've forgotten by now.　←　Epistemic reading (speaker is somewhat unsure)

I tend to read it as in 1, I think.

Anonymous

4:32 PM

Needs more context. :-)

Anonymous

But generally speaking, for most expressions, the deontic reading is more likely.

Ahh... Perhaps a right context could change my reading.

Anonymous

It depends on the expression, though.

Anonymous

I can't characterize it without looking it up.

Anonymous

Right now, I am too lazy.

4:33 PM

Hehe.

Anonymous

(Lookit me, all leaving my auxiliaries uncontracted after talking about how "hyperformal" it is. I'm a walking contradiction!)

Anonymous

Must be my description of when to contract them needs some work… :-)

Perhaps thinking in Japanese too much lately. ;-)

Anonymous

I was accused earlier today of thinking that Japanese is a calque of English.

Anonymous

The misunderstanding began, ironically, because the other person was using "understanding" to mean 分かる, as though they were the same thing.

4:35 PM

Can anyone try this to correct: John, I would like to inform you that for helping you in making a decision regarding the best plan for you, we have a separate team of experts who is especially appointed for this purpose of providing personalized assistance and guidance.

Please suggest if you have some better choice of words.

Anonymous

Isn't there some sort of script you're supposed to follow?

Nope

a separate team of experts who is... Hmm...

I am looking at from grammar standpoint and better choice of words.

I'd say who are.

4:39 PM

Why?

Because of experts.

'Team' is always treated like a singular noun. then why 'are'?

Team of experts.

I guess, that makes sense.

So, team is a who?

I didn't get the question.

How often do you refer to a team as a who?

(I'm not sure. I usually don't think of a team as a person.)

4:43 PM

A team is a group of people but one 'team' not teams.

Anonymous

Well, let's take another tack.

Sure,

I think we have an ELL question on that, recently.

3

Q: Band Name Grammar

If there is a name of a band, like The Black Keys, do you say "The Black Keys are awesome*" or "The Black Keys is awesome"? Normally, you would say a band is 'they,' but then you would say 'they are awesome', but a band is one thing so you would say 'that band is awesome.' Which one is correct f...

grammar word-choice

Anonymous

> a separate team of [ experts [ who are especially appointed for this purpose of providing personalized assistance and guidance ] ]

Anonymous

> a separate [ team (of experts) [ which is especially appointed for this purpose of providing personalized assistance and guidance ] ]

4:45 PM

That's what I was thinking about, I think.

Though I didn't know exactly what I was thinking about. :)

Anonymous

It is true that team isn't always treated as singular, but we don't need to demonstrate that for this particular example.

Anonymous

We can always demonstrate it anyway. Some corpus examples from BNC:

Anonymous

> His team were booed off at Vicarage Road after their eighth game without a win.

Anonymous

> On the day that Dalglish left Anfield, the team were three points clear at the top and in the fifth round of the FA Cup.

Anonymous

> This is the first time UEFA has banned a Dutch club, but two years ago the national team were ordered to replay a European Championship qualifying match behind closed doors after Cyprus's goalkeeper had been struck by a firework.

Anonymous

4:48 PM

> She was living with her boyfriend as she had for the last eight years and the hospital team were quite happy to talk to him about the proposed care plan for her.

Anonymous

> At that time it was not realised that the investigating team were already in possession of the evidence necessary to determine the cause of the accident and it was entirely fortuitous that the body that was removed from under the pathologist's nose was not one containing vital evidence.

Anonymous

And so on.

Anonymous

5:04 PM

@DamkerngT. It's a sad day for me.

Anonymous

My oldest snail passed away.

Eh?

Oh, I'm sorry to hear that.

Snaily, I think.

5:46 PM

Do you think 'other alternatives' needs an article in this case: Would you like me to provide other alternatives to send the documents?

Anonymous

Do you think the reader can identify which alternatives you're discussing?

Anonymous

No. You haven't specified which ones. So the probably isn't appropriate

Reader doesn't know it at all.

7:07 PM

Interestingly, there's a new thread on ELL: “Simple past” when talking about possibility -- where I'd think the OP's question might have been better if it had been "why is present tense used for some verbs?" :)