| Last month | Last 3 months | All time | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Completed lessons | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Attendance rate | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Thank you for your answers, Michael and Jack!
But the error seems still there unsolved...since it asks for identifying which part of the sentence is unnecessary/redundant and should be deleted...
Michael, it is kind of you to present the meaning of two 'trying's specifically, while I assume the two have different meaning and usage and thus cannot be deleted?
Actually, I am learning English as a foreign language and can also sense the sentence a bit awkward. Yet in the question direction it indicates specifically about the mistake of "redundancy", but I cannot say exactly where... so I hope to get it clear with the help of native speakers.
0 votedDecember 16, 20160- Help needed from native English speakers to identify sentence error!
Hi there!
I am working on a booklet aiming to improve writing and there is a sentence like this:
The exam was very trying, and I kept trying to finish on time without making too many errors.
The question for the sentence above is that it has redundant part that should be eliminated. I fail to identify which part is unnecessary and would you please do me a favor?
Thx a lot!
December 15, 201660 - HOW to understand the following essay question? This is a TOEFL writing task 2 question and it goes like this: Some people believe that when busy parents do not have a lot of time to spend with their children, the best use of that time is to have fun playing games or sports. Others believe that it is best to use that time doing things together that are related to schoolwork. Which of the two approaches do you prefer? The confusion part is about the " the best use of THAT time". So, grammatically or pragmatically, which is the better way for "THAT" time? Is THAT time the time that the parents spend with their children, OR the time that children spend without their parents because they are busy? Or in other words, what should the test-takers respond? Are the both way all right as long as they define "THAT" time at the beginning of their essay? Answers from native speakers or TOEFL tutors are so welcomed!August 22, 201650
- The first with comma, 100% correct and it fits the requirement for academic English convention. (If you are taking any ACT/SAT test, you have to follow such rules to get a high score.) Why comma? Because “in your letter” is already an adverbial phrase, and after it goes the main sentence, so main sentence needs to be separate to avoid confusion or ambiguity. The second one without is all right in spoken or informal writing.0 votedMarch 22, 20160
- You are asking the basic question of forming NP (noun phrase) in English. Actually, there may be more than two ways to for NP, yet I won't go that far. 1. NP--> adj+N. the focus here is the latter noun, and the adj. before it MODIFIES the feature/character of the N. 2. NP--> N1+N2 the focus is for N2, and the N1 identifies the origin/source of the N2. e.g. silk shirt, book store. Specially, for this case, there mostly are "settled" phrases, like "hot dog" (as the fast food) v.s. "hot dog" (as a dog that is hot). 3.NP--> N1 + of N2 the focus is the N1, and the of N2 signifies the possessor of N1. And this is for nouns of non-living things, like the map of the World, the wall of the classroom, the virtue of honesty. Specifically, when the nouns are living things, we use apostrophe (') to indicate possessor, like The horse's tail, Jim's sister or metaphorically, today's news. Above are the linguistic reasons for your questions if you do want to know why and how thoroughly. Yet it is as simple to fit the rules next time and as the more you learn, the better you understand.0 votedMarch 22, 20162
That is absolutely hard to answer since each one may have a subjective answer that fits him/her the best!
Personally, one's mother tongue is better sounding considering the fact that one hears it since his birth and is most familiar with the sound, while a totally exotic language that even contains dozens of "sounds" one cannot articulate may be unpleasant for the adverse reasons.
However, if taken from a linguistic point of view, maybe, a pitched language, like Chinese, may sound better than an unpitched one, say, German.
After all, I dare not assume any finite result...You may well conduct a little survey to find out the opinions site-wide.
Enjoy the fun then!
0 votedMarch 22, 20160- 源 yuán ①水流起头的地方:河~│泉~│发~│~远流长│饮水思~。 ②来源:货~│资~│病~。 ③(Yuán)姓。 The collocations you presented may be correct, grammatically; but not pragmatically...c'z they sound weird to native speakers, like me. 源can be collocated with substatiated things, as the above examples, and unsubstatiated objects, like, 电源, 根源,your 痛苦源(though 痛苦的源头is better). I suggest you doing some basic readings on Modern Chinese morphology to figure out the rules for Chinese phrase and it will be much easier to learn plenty of phrases after you know the single character! For example, 源泉 and 泉源 are almost different things though the characters are the same.0 votedJanuary 6, 20133
2: According to statistics, in the Yuan dynasty there was over a thousand Hutongs, by the Qing dynasty the number had grown to nearly 2000. During the time of the Republic of China there was over 1900. When the People's Republic of China was founded statistics say there was more than two thousand five hundred and fifty. However, now there are only about 300.
据统计,在明代元代北京有上千胡同,到了清代胡同发展到近两千条。民国时有一千九百多条。新中国成立时统计有两千五百五十多条。不过,现在只有三百多条。
0 votedJanuary 6, 20130
