|
navi |
|
Advanced Member |
| None Specified |
|
|
Friday, May 16, 2014 |
|
Thursday, May 6, 2021 7:17:14 AM |
556
[0.05% of all post / 0.22 posts per day] |
|
Are these sentences correct:
1) He hit me with his hammer of a fist.
2) He hit me with his hammers of fists.
3) He lives in a palace of a house.
4) They live in palaces of houses.
Gratefully,
Navi
|
Which are correct:
1) Any person with more than two houses in New York should know about this new regulation.
2) Any person with more than two houses residing in New York should know about this new regulation.
3) Any person with more than two houses, in New York, should know about this new regulation.
4) Any person with more than two houses, residing in New York, should know about this new regulation.
5) Any person who has more than two houses, in New York, should know about this new regulation.
6) Any person who has more than two houses, residing in New York, should know about this new regulation.
a) A person might reside in NY and have more than two houses elsewhere.
b) A person might have more than two houses in NY and reside elsewhere.
Which of the sentences 1-4 could be used if he person resides in NY and the houses might or might not be in NY.
I suppose the natural assumption would be that both the houses and the person are in NY. But this is a grammatical question.
Gratefully,
Navi
|
1) Doing nothing for a whole week is unacceptable for John.
2) For John, doing nothing for a whole week is unacceptable.
3) Doing nothing for a whole week is unacceptable to John.
4) To John, doing nothing for a whole week is unacceptable.
Which means:
a) John finds it unacceptable that he should do nothing for a whole week.
which means:
b) John finds it unacceptable that anyone should do nothing for a whole week.
and which means:
c) It is unacceptable that John should do nothing for a whole week.
Gratefully,
Navi
|
1) It is unacceptable for us to make noise after ten o'clock in the evening.
2) For us to make noise after ten o'clock in the evening is unacceptable.
3) For us, to make noise after ten o'clock in the evening is unacceptable.
Aren't all these sentences ambiguous?
Can't they mean:
a) We consider it unacceptable to make noise after ten o'clock in the evening.
and:
b) It is unacceptable that we should make noise after ten o'clock in the evening.
I am sure the ambiguity wouldn't cause any problem in real life. Context will clarify everything. I am just trying to figure out how the structure works.
Gratefully
Navi
|
Which are correct:
1) It is threatening for a huge man like you to storm into a woman's office like that.
2) For a huge man like you to storm into a woman's office like that is threatening.
3) It is threatening to a woman for a huge man like you to storm into her office like that.
4) For a huge man like you to storm into a woman's office like that is threatening to her.
5) It is threatening that a huge man like you should storm into a woman's office like that.
6) That a huge man like you should storm into a woman's office like that is threatening.
7) It is threatening to a woman that a huge man like you should storm into her office like that.
8) That a huge man like you should storm into a woman's office like that is threatening to her.
I have tried to cover all the possibilities...
Gratefully,
Navi
|
Thank you both very much,
How about:
2) I had altogether too much fun doing it.
3) He earned altogether too much money.
I think '2' means 'I really had too much fun'. I don't know if 'altogether' has that meaning only with 'too much fun' or if becomes an intensifier when it it coupled with 'too'.
Basically, I am not sure of anything!
Gratefully,
Navi
|
1) I had altogether a lot of fun doing it.
Is the sentence correct, and if it is what does 'altogether' mean in it?
Gratefully,
Navi
|
1) He said things he didn't know were true.
I think this sentence means:
He said things that were true but he didn't know they were true.
Is that correct?
Gratefully,
Navi
|
1) Harry, at the bank, told the police that the robbers had three hostages.
2) At the bank, Harry told the police that the robbers had three hostages.
Are those sentences ambiguous?
I see three possible cases, although "a" and "b" can't really be considered to be different meanings. It is just that the context is unclear.
a) Harry was at the bank and he told the police (probably by telephone) that the robber had three hostages.
b) Once he was at the bank (once he got into the bank), he contacted the police (by phone or radio) that the robber had three hostages.
c) Harry told the police at the bank that the robbers had three hostages. (Both Harry and the police were at the bank)
Gratefully,
Navi
|
If someone uses the term 'toxic masculinity' does that indicate that he or she necessarily believes that there is a form of masculinity that is not toxic?
Could someone who thinks all masculinity is toxic use the expression 'toxic masculinity'?
And if someone says:
We witnessed disgusting sexism in that place.
is the implication that some forms of sexism are not sexist?
Gratefully,
Navi
|
|