|
NKM |
|
Advanced Member |
| Retired computer programmer; musician |
| Language in general, English in particular |
| Male |
|
|
|
Saturday, February 14, 2015 |
|
Tuesday, June 25, 2019 11:36:34 AM |
5,140
[0.55% of all post / 3.22 posts per day] |
|
Not really causative, but merely idiomatic.
To "make use of" and to "make [something] available" are essentially set phrases with specific meanings.
|
One more point: You would make an appointment in order to avoid (not "skip") the wait.
|
I won't try to second-guess Wilmar, but:
It would be unusual for a a native speaker to say "You are welcome" in response to "Thank you." It would normally be the contracted form: "You're welcome!"
On the other hand, you might hear "You are very [or quite, or entirely] welcome!" as an emphatic response to "Thank you."
"Welcome" is an adjective, as in "You will be a welcome guest in our home."
|
It is very common to use the word "securities" to mean "stocks and bonds".
Here's a dictionary definition (one of several) of "security":
6. A financial instrument, such as a stock or bond, representing rights of ownership or creditorship and often traded in secondary markets.
(Link)
|
Clearly, "much" is often an adverb.
"You talk too much."
"That didn't hurt much, did it?"
"I have a much better idea."
Not to mention song lyrics like "I love you so much it hurts me" and "You're much older than I".
|
Let me once again proclaim my opinion that English does in fact have a full set of disjunctive pronouns, which happen to have the same form as the objective ones.
Grammarians may deny that claim, but native speakers freely put it into practice.
|
On the other hand, the "remains" in this case seem to have been only a lower leg and foot, not a whole body. Thus I'm inclined to favor saying "those" rather than "that".
However, one might even simply say "the remains … were of the farmer."
|
I don't think so. Either form could be used in either dialect, and both seem overly complicated.
Then there's the "generic you" form: "If you have money, you can get anything in your life."
More realistically, one might say:
"If you've got the money, you can get anything."
(Note that "the money" in this usage means "enough money".)
Edit:
I wrote this in the duplicate thread before discovering that FounDit had beaten me to it here, so I copied my response here and deleted it from the duplicate.
NKM
|
The plain fact is that one tends to cringe at hearing "one student are …", even when both logic and grammar seem to call for the plural form. In fact, native speakers often avoid this kind of construction because it "feels wrong".
The problem is mainly associated with the present simple tense, and indeed the specific sentence seems to have been concocted for the purpose of demonstrating the difficulty. In most situations, we're more likely to speak of what has happened or what may/should/will happen.
The awkardness disappears if we say:
"More than one student had to be punished." - or -
"More than one student will be punished."
And of course, as RuthP points out, it's easy to just say "several/some/many students" instead of "more than one student".
|
Indeed, it does make more sense once we've been told that Molang is a TV series or program.
However, I'm not sure "is" is the right verb. Perhaps "displays" or "exposes" would be more appropriate. (?)
|
|