The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: Rajinder Tyagi
About
User Name: Rajinder Tyagi
Forum Rank: Newbie
Occupation: Retired Ssenior Indian Air Force Officer
Interests: Teaching English
Gender: Male
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Thursday, August 13, 2015
Last Visit: Monday, August 31, 2015 12:46:23 PM
Number of Posts: 190
[0.02% of all post / 0.17 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: made to repair
Posted: Monday, August 31, 2015 3:33:32 AM
[quote=azz]Can one say
a. This suit was designed to be worn in extreme cold weather.
b. This suit was designed to wear in extreme cold weather.
c. This suit was designed for wearing in extreme cold weather.

d. This tool was made to be used in repairing heavy machinery.
e. This tool was made to repair heavy machinery.
f. This tool was made for repairing heavy machinery.

?

The detailed comments are as under:

1. This suit was designed to be worn in extreme cold weather.
The sentence is correct.

2. This suit was designed to wear in extreme cold weather.
The sentence is incorrect. It implies that the suit is meant to wear something!

3. This suit was designed for wearing in extreme cold weather.
The sentence is incorrect. The correct construction is “designed for something/somebody” and “design something for something”. A few examples are:
- She designed a new logo for the company.
- This range of clothing is specially designed for shorter women.

4. This tool was made to be used in repairing heavy machinery.
The sentence is correct. It means: This tool was made (in order) to be used in repairing heavy machinery. (NOTE: The use of (in order) is optional. The sentence gives the purpose of making the tool.)

5. This tool was made to repair heavy machinery.
The sentence is incorrect. It implies that the tool was forced/compelled to …. This sense is wrong.

6. This tool was made for repairing heavy machinery.
The sentence is incorrect. In idiomatic sense, one example of the phrasal verb is:
- I think it's time we made for home. (= to go in the direction of a particular place [= head for])
Topic: Consult me, please, on 13 points
Posted: Monday, August 31, 2015 2:25:12 AM
The comments are:
1. “to go on foot to somebody (written as “sb”) The first expression is wrong.
2. “after everybody had left she tasted (tasted what? Specify the noun)” The sequence “Past Perfect followed by Past Indefinite” is used when there are two unconnected actions/events and are not sub-events of one major activity and also they should not have cause and effect relationship.
3. The expression “the wife of king’s son” is okay. It is not compulsory to say the second expression.
4. “named after sb (i.e. somebody)” means the individual has got the same name as the person denoted by “somebody”. “Call after sb.” Can be avoided.
5. “They agreed that whoever saw the …”. Are years named after individuals? Perhaps you meant “month” instead of “year”! “one of them” implies that there were more than one person. If we are talking of two persons, the expression can be “They agreed that either of them who …”
6. "Take away any thing that you like from this home (or this house?)" “House” is used to signify a structure/building. “Home” is an adverb and is used to represent a place one uses to relax and feels comfortable in. “ "Take any thing that you like away ” is wrong. Remember the sequence “Take + pronoun + preposition” in case of phrasal verb. A Noun can be put before the preposition or after it. “… from our home …” is acceptable if a common home is shared.
7. Yes, very is used before an adjective. So “very pretty” is acceptable and correct. A word of caution, do not say “too pretty”
8. “Beforehand” is an adverb meaning “before something else happens or is done”. “In advance (of something)” means “before something happens or is expected to happen”. They mean the same. Remember that “advance” is a noun in the given expression.
9. The participle clause “Having deceived …” the structure is correct. The correct clause is, ”Having deceived you, he invited you to eat fish and brought you here.”
10. “To clear …” is wrong. Say, “to mistake somebody for somebody”. The nouns represented by “somebody” would need to be used in actual speech.
11. The phrasal verbs “to hand out” and “to hand in ...) can be best understood by referring a good dictionary. I am reproducing the extract: hand something ↔ in phrasal verb
to give something to someone in authority:
- Tom has handed in his resignation.
- Did you hand your homework in on time?
hand something ↔ on phrasal verb = to give something to someone:
- He was accused of handing on government secrets.
hand something ↔ out phrasal verb = to give something to each person in a group [= distribute]:
- Could you start handing these books out please?
hand something ↔ out to
- He was handing out leaflets to members of the audience.
12. “Excrete” is a formal word meaning “to get rid of waste material from your body through your bowels, your skin etc” “Defecate” is also a formal word that means “to get rid of waste matter from your bowels”. It is the correct word in case of animals.
13. The second expression should be "In the origin of the world". The preposition “on” will not fit. However, be careful when using this phrase as a part of a sentence. This expression will rarely occur at the start of a sentence.
Topic: Case of personal pronoun after 'become'
Posted: Monday, August 31, 2015 12:49:28 AM
Audiendus wrote:
Consider the following sentence:

1. When a great actor plays a character such as Hamlet, it is as if the actor actually becomes him.

Would it be grammatically wrong (rather than merely stilted) to say "he" instead of "him", and if so, why? Compare:

2. "Are you Hamlet in tonight's play?" "Yes, I am he."

3. When a great actor plays a character such as Hamlet, it is as if the actor actually is him (he?).


Verbs in general including the verb "become(s)", are followed by Objective Pronouns (him, her, me, us, them etc. 'To be" verbs i.e. am, is, are, is, was, were etc. are followed by a subjective pronoun (I, we, they, she, he etc.). These aspects are followed in formal and conventional writing. In informal usage, frequent violations are observed.

Hence, the use of "becomes him" in sentence 1 is correct. I would term the use of subjective pronoun "he" after "become(s) as incorrect. In sentence 2, the use of subjective pronoun "he" after the verb "am" is correct. In sentence 3, one has to chose a pronoun after the "to be" verb "is". By now, it should be clear that "he" is the correct pronoun. It is better to follow the rule and not cover one's error by saying, "everyone speaks like this!"
Topic: Child was reached
Posted: Monday, August 31, 2015 12:18:21 AM
prince wrote:
Which of the following is correct with reference to a missing child finally returns to the family by the Police
a) Child was finally reached to his parents by police
b) Child had reached his family by police
c) Police had finally saw the child returning his family
4) We saw the child reaching his family finally ( we = police)


I am afraid all the four constructions need considerable improvement. In fact, all of them are grammatically incorrect Perhaps you might like to consider:
- The child was helped by the police to return to his family.

If it is a heading in a newspaper etc. one may say:
- Child returns home with police help.
Topic: him's - my eyes and him's
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 4:04:27 PM
rogermue wrote:
I'm reading a story that begins with "We are standing in front of each other ...
My eyes and him's meet ..."

Here the author uses "my eyes and him's" instead of the usual
"my eyes and his".

There is no problem in understanding "him's" or better "hims",
there is even some logic in the form.

Either it is an individual invention and expression or some speakers
really use this form somewhere. A quick research on the Internet didn't
have any results.

Does anybody know such a form as "him's"?

Him's did not exist even in Old English. So, I presume it is a part of dialect of some localised area in U.K.! Sorry, could not throw light on this word.
Topic: ...that you/they should field candidates who are qualified...
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 3:49:16 PM
[quote=Koh Elaine]Ms Fatimah said, "I feel that with the candidates' background, my potted plant can be an MP. We are sending a message to all political parties that you should field candidates who are qualified and capable, not any Tom, Dick and Harry."

Shouldn't "they" be used instead of "you"?

Thanks.

They” is a more appropriate pronoun than “you”. It is in plural. Use of third person is better. However you may also like to consider a few other modifications:

Ms Fatimah said, "I feel that with the candidates' background, (even) my potted plant could be an MP. We are sending a message to all political parties that you should field candidates who are qualified and capable, not any Tom, Dick and Harry."

NOTE: "Can" is not used to talk about chances that something will actually happen or is actually true at this moment. The meaning is expressed by the modals could/may/might.
Topic: theatre play or piece of theatre
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 3:37:22 PM
Elmmosa wrote:
We saw a theatre play few days ago.
We saw a piece of theatre a few days ago.

Which sentence sounds more natural?


I am afraid both sentences are incorrect, so where is the question of being natural. The sentences are corrected as under:

We saw a theater play few days ago.
We saw a play a few days ago.

(“Play” is performed by actors, especially in a theater. The compound noun ‘theater play’ is incorrect. "Few" means "hardly any" while "a few" means "some")

We saw a piece of theater a few days ago.
We saw a play a few days ago.
A piece of theater” means “writing that is suitable for dramatic presentation”. Its use in the present context is not required.
Topic: the food is too highly spiced
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 3:08:18 PM
[quote=Elmmosa]We want to go out for dinner.
But I don't want to go to the restaurant a friend suggest because the food is too spicy for me.
I said: Let's look for another restaurant where the food is not so highly spiced.

Does that make sense?

The text, after improvement is as under:

We want to go out for dinner. (Sentence is correct)

But I don't want to go to the restaurant a friend suggest because the food is too spicy for me.
But I don't want to go to the restaurant suggested by my friend because the food (served) there is too spicy for me.


I said: Let's look for another restaurant where the food is not so highly spiced.
I said: Let's look for another restaurant where the food is not so richly/ liberally spiced.

"Richly" and "liberally" are better words than "richly".
Topic: I can't wait for it to Australia.
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 2:57:34 PM
[quote=bihunsedap]They will going to travel to Australia tomorrow.
The kid is excited and can't wait for it.

"I can't wait for it to Australia. I wish I am at Australia right now." the kid said.

Is it grammatically correct?

The modifications are mentioned below:

They will going to travel to Australia tomorrow.
They are travelling to Australia tomorrow.
Present Progressive Tense is commonly used when talking about a future event when personal arrangements and fixed plans, especially the time and place have been decided. Use of “…going to Australia …” instead of “… are travelling to …” is also correct.

The kid is excited and can't wait for it.
The kid is excited and can’t wait to be in Australia.”
In the original sentence, the pronoun “it” has been used. What does the pronoun “it” refer to? It is not very clear. It is better to say, “The kid is excited and can’t wait to be in Australia.”or “The kid is excited and can’t wait for the trip/ to go."

"I can't wait for it to Australia. I wish I am at Australia right now." the kid said.
"I can't wait to get to (arrive in) Australia. I wish I were in Australia right now." the kid said.
To get to” means "to arrive in”. “To get to” is more idiomatic. “Were” is used when the mentioned situation does not exist. The preposition ‘in’ is used before a country/continent.
Topic: They have a communication problem.
Posted: Sunday, August 30, 2015 2:21:45 PM
bihunsedap wrote:
The boy is saying about topic A.
The girl is saying about topic B.
The boy thought she was saying about topic A.

They have a communication problem.
What the other word to describe well the situation above.


Yes, there is a barrier in communication. In a formal context, the expression "Barrier in communication" is better than "communication problem". In an informal context one can use expressions like "they are not on the same page/wavelength/frequency".

The last line of the text gives the clue of the Tense required. It is in Past Indefinite Tense. Hence the first two sentences mentioning actions/events that happened before the actions mentioned in sentence 3 should be in Past Tense or Progressive form as appropriate – in this case Past Continuous Tense.

The verb “talk” and its Progressive form “talking” mean “to discuss something serious or important with someone”. “Say” and its Progressive Form “saying” mean “to express an idea, feeling, thought etc using words”. In the given text, “talking” is more appropriate than “saying”.

The text should be modified as follows:

The boy is saying about topic A.
- The boy is talking about topic A.

The girl is saying about topic B.
- The girl is talking about topic B.

The boy thought she was saying about topic A.
- The boy thought she was talking about topic A.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.