@Robusto no in that case, an extinguisher, or a high pressure water, or whatever weapon is permitted in my sense, but I'm more concerned about the secondhandsmoke than the skin burning (that heals easily)
Speaking of gendarmes, the ones I saw didn't look like a friendly lot. Standing on corners with automatic weapons, looking ready to clear the streets by any means necessary.
@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 Interesting idea. I wonder if you could make one that goes in the back pocket of your jeans, so it would remind you everywhere to get up and move around. And maybe it could just buzz your phone or something, so that the alarm would be discreet in public places.
Erm, no. I foreseeable them to be harmed. I don't think the writer was confusing his sentence with that one. Secondly, the fact that you had to consult your rules to decide if the sentence was wrong shows that it isn't! Native speakers doesn't has to consult their rules to decision whether a sentence is ungrammatically, they knows it, because it's either hurt thems natural ear, or it don't. Completely not the case with the sentences discussed . — Araucaria2 hours ago
@ttchrist The law texts observation is being misunderstood here. This use is very common all over the place, not just in law texts. Also, look, we know when people make grammatical mistake doesn't we? It hurts our doesn't it? OP's sentence doesn't do this - because it's, erm, correct... :) — Araucaria3 hours ago
@JohanLarsson It's just a joke. I'm reacting to the "For Research Only" super on the video, which is funny all by itself. The idea that you one would be doing "research" instead of dancing is just funny.
@JohanLarsson In America, humor often plays off the black/white stereotypes. In this case, it's the bookish white kid's "research" project vs. the raw, expressive power of black music. Ain't no thang.
Every time I allow HP to install printer software I regret it. This time it's telling me that my connection to the scanner has dropped. Like I give a fuck. I can't remember the last time I had to scan something. Probably for a job.
@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 I'm more of a sixpac kinda guy.
@Araucaria: My sentence with "I" was only one example of the different constructions that might interfere with one's intuition. Of course not I foreseeable. It is foreseeable for them to be harmed is possible, however. There are many possibilities, many of which have the accusative/objective case. This confusion is generally enough to flip the relative pronoun in complex sentences. I disagree with your suggestion that proper style is whatever a certain number of native speakers would write (or there wouldn't be style guides for native speakers). — Cerberus58 secs ago
Ah, yes, well, as usually, Pullum has some vision of style that is based more on colloquial speech by the average person, who is of course not very much interested in issues stylistic.
@tchrist So why that as of yours? Do you stand by it? I would have expected either enough...not to or enough...so as not to.
@tchrist Are you kidding? That's a local-paper bonanza. The cornerstone of every rural news outlet's summer menu. After that, there's not much until the giant pumpkin contest in October.
deleting my soundcloud account any minute anyways, their site has consistently gone downhill for a long time, and they just announced their database is open to Universal Music Group to manipulate whatever
Also when their horrible software finally synchronizes, lots of people still have problems just using their MP3 player (myself included)
I can (and have) written better music streaming websites in 8 hour timespans, if they can't figure out how to encode an MP3 and host it on the cloud they need to get the hell out of the game
The report said that years ago city planners had built a facility that turns salt water into fresh water, but financial woes made that impossible.
In this sentence should turned be used instead of turns?
I know the past tense carries the past tense in every dependent clause, but referring specifically to places or to things that are eternal, like the Earth, seems a bit weird and therefore we sometimes (I believe incorrectly) say
He didn't know that New Jersey was actually in the East Coast.
...
@tchrist Hmm. Yes, that the question is using the present tense for something that would still be the case if it had happened at all. But it didn't happen, so the tense should match, turned. It's not the same as Arrowfar's question on using the past tense for something which is still true.
I have no idea how to find a duplicate for that. There must be one by now.
My knowledge of realis and irrealis moods (which I'm sure are relevant here) is not up to providing an answer which can be a canonical reference for the future.
Hm. I haven’t thought about it much, but I’m not completely sure that applies, in that the only place we see an explicitly marked unreal mode is with hypothetical were.
I'd like to say "Quite" -- this instance shouldn't have an odd form of verb. But I don't know that describing something which has never been true is indicative.
The report said that years ago city planners had planned to build a facility that turns salt water into fresh water, but financial woes made that impossible.
In this sentence should turned be used instead of turns?
There seem to be instances of hypothetical were out there for some of these, but I can’t tell whether this is some Shakespearean holdout or contamination from languages with a past subjunctive form.
Well, the answer to the new question about something which has never been true is definitely "past tense", but I couldn't elucidate why that's so (which is what I'd expect in a good answer).
On the one hand, things that are true always are in the present tense by default. On the other hand, the harmony of tenses exerts pressure on subordinate clauses to "catch" the past tense from the main clause. The result is that both tenses are possible in most cases.
@AndrewLeach In the example, the relative clause describes a general property of a certain type of facility; the type and its properties are timeless facts.
@tchrist I don't know why you would say that. My answer of several years ago tells visitors it is optional.
The direct object of recall is the entire nonfinite clause you disparaging that possibility: the direct object of that clause is that possibility and the subject of that clause is you.
We just went over this.
No, the direct object of hear in I hear (the) children singing is the gerund clause (the) children singing. Try a cleft on it: (The )Children singing is what I hear; or passivize it: Children singing (sweetly) was heard by everyone in the room. — John Lawler37 mins ago
> The central word of a non-finite clause is usually a non-finite verb (as opposed to a finite verb). There are various types of non-finite clauses that can be acknowledged based in part on the type of non-finite verb at hand. Gerunds are widely acknowledged to constitute non-finite clauses, and some modern grammars also judge many to-infinitives to be the structural locus of non-finite clauses.
Mine is a personal pronoun; my is a possessive determiner. Which do you mean?
So of course there are such things as non-finite clauses. I don’t know why you thought there weren’t.
Only as independent clauses must clauses be finite.
In this sentence is singing a verb or a gerund?
Look at the children whom you can hear singing.
In the sentence: "I didn't know she had a son,"
Can I say "I didn't know she has a son" instead, because he is a teenager now?
Or are both correct?
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…
English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…