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

Profile: NancyUK
About
User Name: NancyUK
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Occupation:
Interests:
Gender: None Specified
Home Page
Statistics
Joined: Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Last Visit: Monday, October 16, 2017 7:51:43 AM
Number of Posts: 703
[0.08% of all post / 0.30 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: stump/stoop so low?
Posted: Friday, October 13, 2017 2:36:13 PM
Hi again

TFD seems to have lost or removed the link, so I'll try again:

Cambridge Dictionary

Edit: nope, it's not showing again.

I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: Can "800th anniversary" be replaced by "800-year anniversary"?
Posted: Friday, October 13, 2017 10:21:47 AM
Hi Koh Elaine

In my opinion, no.

The 800th anniversary means the 800th time the annual anniversary has occurred.

The 800-year anniversary would be the first and only time that it is 800 years since the "advent of the founder".

Incidentally, the word advent is a little odd here in my view. It has Christian religious connotations, so a synonym would be preferable. Arrival, birth or similar.

I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: stump/stoop so low?
Posted: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:38:51 AM
Hi yummyspringroll

As others have said, one correct version of the idiom is they stooped so low.

However, the idiom that I'm more familiar with is:

They have sunk so low.

I couldn't find this is TFD, but have a look at this link to the Cambridge Dictionary:
Sink so low


I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: What did you do at 11 pm last night?
Posted: Thursday, October 05, 2017 11:41:19 AM
Hello onsen

The difference in all of these possible answers is the tense. Have a look at TFD under tense with the following link: Tense

1. What did you do at 11 pm last night?

Past Simple Tense
We use the past simple tense to express finished actions. It is often used with an expression of past time to give more complete information.

Example: Did you go to bed at 11 pm last night?

2. What were you doing at 11 pm last night?

Past Continuous Tense
The past continuous tense (also called the past progressive tense) is used for something in progress at a certain moment in the past. It can only be used with action verbs.

Example: Were you watching TV at 11 pm last night?

3. What had you done at 11 pm last night?

Past Perfect Tense
The past perfect tense expresses the idea that something occurred before another action in the past. It can also show that something happened before a specific time in the past. This one would need some changes to work:

Example: Had you already eaten all the ice cream by 11 pm last night?



I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: The sun shines on your seat.
Posted: Thursday, October 05, 2017 10:32:37 AM
Hi bihunsedap

jacobusmaximus' advice is good.

The reason it does not sound right is that you have used simple present, which is used for things that happen habitually (among other uses). This doesn't work here because the sun doesn't always shine on that seat. You need to use present continuous tense to describe what is happening. Another suggestion would be:

"My back is hot" he told me.

"Yes. The sun is shining on your seat." I said.


I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: emerged vs surfaced
Posted: Thursday, October 05, 2017 8:25:25 AM
Hi Koh Elaine

Emerged is more suitable than surfaced, in my opinion.

However may I suggest:

The long-term effects of blood transfusion came to light ... or became apparent ...?

I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: Which is the correct sentence?
Posted: Thursday, October 05, 2017 8:13:53 AM
Hi Koh Elaine

Koh Elaine wrote:
Every day, I encouraged myself to be consistent in my practice and strived to overcome all daily problems.
This one is not correct in BE, but is probably OK in AE. The past participle of strive is strove in BE. To be consistent, you have to use the same tense in both parts of the sentence (which you have done):
You encouraged yourself ... and strove...

Every day, I encouraged myself to be consistent in my practice and strive to overcome all daily problems.
This is fine in my view. It is slightly different from the previous example, as you are treating the two parts as one:
I encouraged myself to be consistent ... and (to) strive ...


Every day, I encouraged myself to be consistent in my practice and to strive to overcome all daily problems.
This one is also fine in my opinion, just a bit more formal as the second to is included.

Which is the correct sentence?

Thanks.


I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: "You scared Aunty."
Posted: Thursday, September 28, 2017 12:07:38 PM
Hi bihunsedap

As others have said, everything you have written is grammatically correct.

A native speaker might use a different word, which is one very commonly used for this exact meaning:

He slammed the door.

slam v.tr.

1. To shut with force and loud noise: slammed the door.

Edit: If he didn't mean to do it (for example if the wind caught it, or it has a strong door closer on it) you could also say:

He let the door slam (or slam shut).

I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: between
Posted: Thursday, September 14, 2017 12:18:14 PM
D00M wrote:
Hello respected teachers,

Are both the following correct? Any difference?

There is a close interaction between universities and trade, commerce and industry.

There is a close interaction between universities, trade, commerce and industry.


Hi D00M

I think there is a difference. In the first, the interaction is between universities on the one hand, and trade, commerce and industry on the other.

In the second sentence, the interaction is between all parties mentioned.





I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash
Topic: have been born
Posted: Thursday, September 07, 2017 8:59:58 AM
Харбин Хэйлунцзян 1 wrote:

Hi XX

Pray, fence, don't tell her I've been here,
With a wig wig wag and a great big bag,
And all the gold and silver in it
That's been made since I've been born.

This is in a country-style dialect - it is not grammatically correct usage.

Here are some sentences that I would like to know if they are correct or not:

I've been born in Tbilisi.
She's been born to a wealthy family.
Not correct. A person is born at a specific time, not an unspecified time in the past.

The baby hasn't been born yet.
Correct, as there is no specific time mentioned.

He has died of cancer.
He's been killed in action.
He's already died.
Correct, as long as it happened recently. Otherwise use simple past.

It's Ann who has killed him.
Incorrect, in my opinion. Should be simple past.

And can I use the Present Perfect to speak about a dead person? For example:

He has been in our town once.
Not in my opinion. Simple past required again.
He was in our town once.




I would live all my life in nonchalance and insouciance, Were it not for making a living, which is rather a nouciance. Ogden Nash

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.