mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Profile: Bathcoup
About
User Name: Bathcoup
Forum Rank: Member
Gender: None Specified
Statistics
Joined: Wednesday, February 24, 2021
Last Visit: Saturday, July 24, 2021 5:39:06 AM
Number of Posts: 144
[0.01% of all post / 0.95 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: Which bold part is correctly punctuated?
Posted: Saturday, July 24, 2021 5:35:12 AM
Sentence 1: Lee Soh Geok has more than one neighbour.
Sentence 2: He has only one neighbour, Helen Lim Hai Loon.

That is if the writer uses commas to make a distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive appositives.
Topic: It was the first time that/when/x
Posted: Saturday, July 24, 2021 5:29:06 AM
Peter can have many first times – first-time experiences.

This is the first time [that] Peter has watched a movie. (“This” refers to going to cinema)
Kissing Kate was the first time [that] Peter had kissed a girl.

[that] means "that" being optional, but we keep “that” for the discussion. Let's assume Peter was with Tom, and both saw a black horse, a racehorse.

It was the first time that Peter had seen a black horse, and the second time that Tom had seen one (a black horse).

It was the first time that Peter and Tom had seen a black racehorse. – the black horse Tom saw at an earlier time wasn’t a racehorse

I don’t have a view on what name should be given to the that-clause, but to me it defines/describes/qualifies a type of event/occasion. The basic form is “XYZ is the nth time that someone sees a black horse”.

the nth time = the nth-time occurrence of that type of occasion

I was sloppy in using the phrase `relative pronoun`; what I had in mind is a more general concept like “relative marker” (Maybe it should be called “relative proform” and then “antecedent” be termed “co-form”).

the reason [that] I did it …
the year [that] Galileo died …


If you call the "it" a dummy, then the master can't be the that-clause. For “That Peter had seen a black horse was the first time” doesn’t read well.
Topic: It was the first time that/when/x
Posted: Saturday, July 17, 2021 6:26:57 PM
Audiendus wrote:
I agree that it should be either 'that' or nothing, not 'when'. However:

I don't think this is quite right. In "It was the first time that Peter had seen a black horse", 'that' is a conjunction, not a demonstrative pronoun. The subject of the second clause is "Peter", not "that". The "that" would not be stressed in speech.
--------------------------

Are you sure the "that" is a conjunction?

It was the first time that Peter had seen a black horse.

It looks like a relative-pronoun; the that-clause defines what kind of "first time" is.
The "It" refers to the seeing of a black horse, which took place some time ago.

With my limited grammar knowledge, I don't even know in what situation "that" is a conjunction.

"It is true that Russia is a big country."
It (dummy) = that-clause, which doesn't define anything. So, I guess, here the "that" is a conjunction.
Topic: Rewording of text
Posted: Saturday, July 17, 2021 6:04:37 PM
Koh Elaine wrote:
Thus, even if we are not actively and assertively engaging in slander against the Law, the fact of not believing in the Lotus Sutra, in itself, is already a form of slander.

Should it be reworded as "...the fact of not believing in the Lotus Sutra is, in itself, already a form of slander."?

Thanks!
---------------

"... engaging in slandering..." -- to be engaged in (activity)

"engaging in slandery" would be ok, but "slandery" is not a word.

slander: damaging words not based on truth

the fact is already a form of slander!?
not believing in the Lotus Sutra is already a form of slander!?

Then you have this scholarly-sounding phrase "in itself", which makes the sentence even worse, wherever it's positioned.
Topic: is or was?
Posted: Thursday, July 15, 2021 6:42:26 PM
tautophile wrote:

An apostrophe-s (" -'s") can be a shortening of either "is" or "was"--but almost always the former. That is, "Singapore's a safe country" can be either "Singapore is a safe country" or (rarely) "Singapore was a safe country".
----------------------

Are you sure "it's" could occasionally represent "it was"?

it's = it is or it has
Sometimes you can't tell which one, like in "it's gone", but you at least know it's the same tense.
Now if "was" were also included, it'd often cause tense-confusion, I think.

Topic: Is or are
Posted: Thursday, July 15, 2021 6:30:38 PM
Dubai wrote:
Hi, there forum members.

Could you please explain which of the following sentence is grammatically correct?

There is two months fee to be paid. - There is two months' fee to be paid (or just "to pay").
There are two months fee to be paid..

Thank you so much.
===================

It looks like a fee, a single fee, for two months (of service) or a two-monthly (subscription) fee.






Topic: be occasionally subject ro abuse / be occasionlly abused
Posted: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 3:46:36 AM
Evening Standard (published two hours ago):
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/sport/euro2021/priti-patel-comes-under-fire-over-gesture-politics-claim-by-england-star-mings/ar-AAM4YIw?ocid=msedgntp

The Home Secretary was among those to criticise the “vile” racist abuse that the players have been subjected to, writing on Twitter: “It has no place in our country and I back the police to hold those responsible accountable.”

The author Emma Bowden understands the difference. Amazing!
Topic: a meaning question
Posted: Tuesday, July 13, 2021 3:38:49 AM
alibey1917 wrote:
"What undermined the legitimacy of the Weimar Republic was not so much the stab-in-the-back myth in any of its various forms as a much more general feeling that the advent of democracy had been accompanied by the national humiliation of the peace settlement and the war-guilt clause of the Treaty of Versailles, for which, therefore, whatever the reasons for Germany’s defeat, it was ultimately responsible." (Richard J. Evans, The Hitler Conspiracies-The Third Reich and the Paranoid Imagination)

I couldn't link the emphasized part to the rest of the sentence, what does that mean in this context?
==================

"which" = "the national humiliation of the peace settlement and the war-guilt clause of the Treaty of Versailles"
Weimar Republic, a democracy (which should earn it legitimacy), unfortunately "was ultimately responsible" for the above, according to Mr. Evans.

"whatever the reasons for Germany’s defeat" - Another way of saying "Weimar Republic was not to blame for the defeat."
Topic: ...there is/are a variety.
Posted: Sunday, July 11, 2021 4:32:12 PM
Wilmar (USA) 1M wrote:
A variety (of anything) is singular.

I’m puzzled. A variety of `plural noun (phrase)` is almost always plural.

Here were many types of homes --- is plural.
=============================

Yes. the word "variety" has the connotations of "different types", but that's not the reason. Even if a different wording
"a selection/collection of homes" were used, the phrase “a choice” would still make it certain that those homes are seen
as distinct individuals. This point is confirmed by the sentence that follows.
Topic: be occasionally subject ro abuse / be occasionlly abused
Posted: Sunday, July 11, 2021 3:25:36 AM
raymondaliasapollyon wrote:
Hi,

Is there any difference between the following sentences?

a. Migrant workers are occasionally abused.

b. Migrant workers are occasionally subject to abuse.

I'd appreciate your help.
-----------------------------------

Migrant workers are occasionally abused. = Migrant workers are occasionally subjected to abuse.

to be subjected to = to be acted on
to be subject to: You and other Members have explained

EDIT:
John's wife was subject subjected to abuse three times last week. = John's wife was abused three times last week.