Took me a while to see how this answer does in fact extend to other examples where "best" is used without "the": the deciding part is if the noun becomes "definite in [the] context", not whether or not there's a real noun. — Dan Getz50 mins ago
I wonder if it's possible to use the with a dummy pronoun. Or maybe he meant some other thing..
Anonymous
@CopperKettle Pronouns don't usually take determiners.
Anonymous
Sometimes they do.
Anonymous
But I'm failing to think of a scenario where dummy it or there would take one.
Maybe that's an ellipsis of "She ran at the fastest speed", but then "she had ever run" fails to attach. "She ran at the fastest speed" she had ever run at"? O_o
Anonymous
A lot of the time, you have a choice between analyzing something as ellipsis or just analyzing it the way it is.
Anonymous
I don't know which is simpler in the case of superlatives.
Backshifting. I still struggle with that. I wonder if backshifting an entire sentence, or mixing tenses changes its meaning.
If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wished. If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we would wish. If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wish.
With your chess skills and English skills, you might just read a chapter from CGEL or Quirk, make a summary in a copy-book, write a blog post about it, and it will be you whom people will approach with such questions.
> On the other hand, the linguists Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey K. Pullum claim that utterances such as "They invited Sandy and I" are "heard constantly in the conversation of people whose status as speakers of Standard English is clear"; and that "Those who condemn it simply assume that the case of a pronoun in a coordination must be the same as when it stands alone. Actual usage is in conflict with this assumption."
A great book would be a book containing the text of Swan's PEU but with hyperlinks to pages in both CGEL and Quirk. So that you could read a simple explanation first, and then dive into deeper matter if so you wish.
"If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party in whenever we wish(ed)". --- looks okay to me. I would only add in.
And i've been wondering, does it matter what tense i using after i'm done with the if + past simple/ present simple , ...would/will part?
Since copper says If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wished. and If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wish. mean the same.
@lekonchekon My reasoning is that "whenever we wish" does not strictly belong to the apodosis "we'd have a place to party". It's just an additional clause.
Both these conditional sentences are grammatical:
If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wish.
If i bought that apartment, we'd have a place to party whenever we wished.
Is there a slight difference in meaning between wish and wished though? Does the p...
@CopperKettle Another possibility that he was thinking about was something like We're visiting another best city. It seems like he was generalizing your assertion "There's no noun that we can attach the to here" to apply to all other cases. Just my thought. To be sure, I think we should wait for his reply.
@Magsi Welcome to the room!
@Magsi Please note that the two rooms aren't the same. The topic of this room is Random thoughts about language, language learning, learners, and their language. It's not the main chat room of ELL.
What about the first example? .-. "From where i'm standing" seems pretty right to me.
Even "From where i stood then" seems right to me, when talking about an opinion i had concerning something that might have, or might not have changed later.
"From where i stood then, the things i had done seemed right"
"From where i stood then, getting married seemed like a terrible option"
Please have a look at this extract from an interview, the question was:
What was it that made you want to choose the drums ?
The blind Baron asked me if I was interested in learning and I took him up on his offer. I had always secretly wanted to learn how to play, but the opportunity ne...
"Why does a sentence start with Past Perfect but continues in Past Simple?" - I changed the heading to make it grammatical, but maybe I really wrecked it.
> And moreover men are liable to eight defects, and (the conduct of) affairs to four evils; of which we must by all means take account. To take the management of affairs which do not concern him is called monopolising. To bring forward a subject which no one regards is called loquacity. To lead men on by speeches made to please them is called sycophancy. To praise men without regard to right or wrong is called flattery. To be fond of speaking of men's wickedness is called calumny. To part friends and separate relatives is called mischievousness. To praise a man deceitfully, or in the same w…
"To have to do" is a substitute form for must. As "to have to do" is a shortened version of "to have the obligation to do" I would say "to have" in this use is a normal verb.
"to have" is an auxiliary verb in the perfect tenses.
Your sentence means: It is possible that people have to go hungry/...
I upvoted the answer, but I'm not sure whether we should think of to have or to have to as an auxiliary verb.
While mailing, I have confused my self like,
I have sent the same to Kevin also.
I have sent the same to Kevin as well.
Which one is correct ?
Is there any difference between the two ?
When I want to talk to someone and the sentence I am using has "too" or "also" or "as well" in it, I get confused and feel like I am using the wrong structure.
For example:
Friend: It's raining here
Me: I wish it was raining here too ( or I wish it was also raining here or I wish it was rainin...
Not only did he give everyone gifts but he invited them to a party also.
Not only did he give everyone gifts but he invited them to a party as well/too.
Which one is more common? or which one is accurate or correct?
As a non-native, I think the first one is less common and probably non-standard. However, if you move also to the position after he, though, you get a typical and usual pattern 'Not only do X ... but X also ...' — FantasierApr 13 '14 at 13:40
We could copy the answer in the old question over to the new one, e.g.
> I am a native speaker, and the first sentence is not standard. It should be - Not only did he give everyone gifts, but he also invited them to a party. The second sentence is OK as is with "as well", but requires a comma before "too". It is also acceptable to put a comma before "as well", if you want.
What is unfit, you or the mountain? In the choice you selected, it's unclear. However, the second selection makes it crystal clear which noun gets the modification.
Another reason #1 is incorrect: You need a noun after the phrase "even though". As an alternative you could use "despite" follow...
I like Snailboat's answer, which she for some reason deleted.
It's clearly a verbless clause with I as the implied subject. I think I'll downvote that winning answer.
I read recently about such kind of clause in Quirk et al.
> During the time that this debate is ever unfolding, there is yet another boundary, the economic boundary, which divides and develops border identity.
> The MET is a standardized English as a foreign language (EFL) examination, aimed at upper beginner to lower advanced levels--A2 to C1 of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR).
@DamkerngT. I think your instinct is sound, but it's not the even though unfit construction -- it's the fact that the even though sense is echoed unnecessarily and annoyingly in still. And that's a problem that all the versions have. A point off for Cambridge/Michigan.
@DamkerngT. "Say" is probably irrelevant: the most fluent users of English make mistakes in speech they wouldn't commit on paper. ... The test appears to be some sort of collaborative venture between Cambridge and Michigan. But what I meant is that the folks who write these tests have a tin ear.
Neither 1. nor 2. is "wrong", but they're both sorta strenuous. If they dropped the "still" I'd find both acceptable. BUT: 2. is self-consciously literary, and 1. is straining for literariness. I agree with your initial judgment, that the natural way of using even though is with a clausal oblique: "Even though I was unfit ..."
But as usual, you've got a better ear than the test-writers!
"Even though I was unfit, I still was able to get to the top of the mountain." --- would even though be a clausal oblique here? I don't understand "clausal oblique". Oblique is a case...
Hi, @CopperKettle ... Oblique is CGEL's useful term for the "object" of a preposition; I'd call though a preposition taking, as you say, a clausal oblique, and even an adverb modifying the PP .
I think it's been translated somewhere else, but not very literally, I guess.
I've read its Thai version (or versions, if you count skimming through a few pages as reading), but it was quite literal, as far as I can tell. I bought its Chinese version back from Beijing but I have never finished a chapter!
@CopperKettle I wanted to read it one line at a time. I can't match the translation I have with the original like that, but this bitext seems to allow me to do so.
There's this test.
The relevant part is:
I have visited so many beautiful places since I ______ (come) to Utah.
Apparently it's more natural to say verb in a Past Simple after "since":
"since i came" = 40,900,000 results
"since i've come" = 8,830,000 results
But is this grammatically in...
> Since can be used as a conjunction of time, introducing its own clause. The tense in the since-clause can be perfect or past, depending on the meaning.
@DamkerngT. From what Wikipedia tells me, this seems to be the 1976 Moss Roberts translation; in 1991 he published a full version in multiple volumes. There's also a complete 1925 Brewitt-Taylor translation; it's been reprinted, but apparently in an abridged form.
> But we could use the present perfect if since refers to an action that started at some indefinite time in the past and has some kind of 'psychological relevance' to the speaker at the moment of speaking. (from an answer by GoDucks)
PEU fails to explain this.
If asked prior to today, I'd earmark such usage as erroneous.
@DamkerngT. This since + Pf is a use I hadn't noticed before; I think you guys have put your finger on what licenses it. Ordinarily since denotes a timespan stretching from an explicitly prior timepoint up to RT -- "Since we came here ..." But when you use a stative verb in which the timepoint refers to the inception of the state, you use a "sham" perfect, in which the HAVE + PaPpl construction is a past-marker.
@CopperKettle I don't think this part discusses only girls. It mustn't be a typo, because the noun "child" is used as feminine in other parts of the book,too. — V.Lydia50 secs ago
Victoria Fromkin (May 16, 1923 – January 19, 2000) was an American linguist who taught at UCLA. She studied slips of the tongue, mishearing, and other speech errors and applied this to phonology, the study of how the sounds of a language are organized in the mind.
== Biography ==
Fromkin was born in Passaic, New Jersey as Victoria Alexandra Landish on May 16, 1923. She earned a bachelor's degree in economics from the University of California at Berkeley in 1944. She married Jack Fromkin, a childhood friend from Passaic, in 1948, and they settled in Los Angeles, California. Their son, Mark, was...
There is no doubt that the statement that seems more formal is
My parents will reside with my family and I.
And if you want to sound more formal, you can use that sentence.
Just note that it is possible to argue that it is technically not grammatical, as CopperKettle has done. But this ...
An answer opposing my answer and I. (0:
Or just adding to them. (0:
You have not demonstrated that it is ungrammatical. — GoDucks19 secs ago
I know that "my family and I" will be marked off as an error in a test, and that's what matters.
In 1966 all of the US currency was withdrawn from Vietnam and our
government printed Military Payment Certificates.
How did he know and how did Bulldog know? I guess he would
have just figured that if I went then Ted would go also. I had always been amazed how some of these guys know...
> The first two excerpts were written in the past tense. Why did the writers use the present tense form of "guess"? Because the reference time changed to the speech time as the writers was writing it? Seems to me it was not very likely.
Hmm... I think he misunderstood it.
Or maybe he unintentionally wrote it inaccurately to his own thoughts.
> We'd love to hear from you! Please send all your general questions and inquiries to [email protected], or post away on meta.stackexchange.com. http://stackexchange.com/about/contact
> We'd love to hear from you! Please send all your general questions and inquiries to [email protected], or post away on ostik.pp.ua/s__meta. http://ostik.pp.ua/about/contact