Not much difference in meaning. However, in the USA, we almost never use "fancy" as a verb, except to be humorous. That's very old-fashioned. Perhaps it's still in use in the U.K.
All attributes of language evolve without oversight. They just happen, as people discover words, idioms and inflections that they find useful, meaningful and easy to say. There are no rules about it. That's why we call them idioms. You can often find older, now-obsolete idioms in song lyrics. From the 19th-century song "Oh Susannah," by Stephen Foster: "I'm going to Louisiana, for to see my Suzie Anna."
"For to see" is used in the King James Bible "But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses." I think that it was already archaic by the time "Oh Susannah" was written, and was a quaint manner of speaking. Another line in the song uses the phrase "Says I": "Says I, I'm coming from the south Susanna, don't you cry" It is possible that some people did use use these phrases, but they were not used in standard written English. It may be used to indicate that the speaker is uneducated. Kipling uses it a few times in his "Barrack Room Ballads" which were written in the voice of a common soldier: When the 'arf-made recruity goes out to the East 'E acts like a babe an' 'e drinks like a beast, An' 'e wonders because 'e is frequent deceased Ere 'e's fit for to serve as a soldier. Serve, serve, serve as a soldier, Serve, serve, serve as a soldier, Serve, serve, serve as a soldier, So-oldier of the Queen!
You need to put a little more effort into studying the structure of our language. "Rude" is an adjective. You can't say "Excuse my rude" any more than you can say "I like your strong" or "How is your painful?" Rudeness, strength and pain are all nouns. So you say, Excuse my rudeness, I like your strength, and How is your pain?
adverbs Source: http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2013/01/themself/ I wonder the difference between the following, and when would you rather apply them? ✓ It’s not an expensive way for somebody to make themselves feel good. ✓ Anyone would find themselves thinking similar thoughts. ✓ It’s not an expensive way for somebody to make himself or herself feel good. ✓ Anyone would find himself or herself thinking similar thoughts. Or like the following: In the second sentence the one who asks wants to close the door THEMSELVES and inquires if that's OK with the other person. Thanks in advance
Become Greetings Do they mean the same thing? would you please elaborate your explanations so that i can understand it well? In addition, the most thing which I am very confused with it is BECOME. Moreover, can we make both a passive sentence and an active sentence with the verb BECOME? Their bodies have become adapted to high altitudes. Their bodies have adapted to high altitudes. Their bodies have been adapted to high altitudes by an unknown phenomenon. Thanks in advance
Subjunctive 2 Have I correctly written the following? It is necessary to have a farm of your own It is necessary be have a farm of your own. Of course, I have asked this question, considering the following: It was his order that all forests be protected. His order was that all forests be protected.
The first sentence is correct; the second is wrong. "to be" and "to have" are separate verbs. "be have" makes no sense. There's an implied missing word in those sentences (although you do sometimes see this kind of thing written in English). For example: "His order was that all forests would be protected." or perhaps "His order was that all forests should be protected." The meaning of this sentence was that at some time in the past, an order was given which, after that time, would result in protection of forests. However, it might be the case that, in fact, the order wasn't followed so that from the point of view of the present the forests were not actually protected, despite the order being given. This is different from "His order was that all forests will be protected." This sentence implies that the forests will be protected some time in the future, relative to the present time, rather than relative to the time that the order was given.
Subjunctive3 http://books.google.com/books?id=ph...sary" be sure the thyroid is healthy"&f=false Would you please take a glance at the link then answer my question? because the link is my only evidence . Which one is correct? It is necessary to be sure the thyroid is healthy. It is necessary be sure the thyroid is healthy.
The first one is OK. The sentence wouldn't normally be considered in best form unless the writer intentionally were trying to be emphatic. "Necessary" and "be sure" carry similar connotations. The following possibilities are probably better. It is necessary to have a healthy thyroid. Be sure to keep the thyroid healthy.
But that may not convey the meaning intended. If the book is an instruction manual, of sorts, then it would be okay to say "it is necessary to be sure that..." as it is conveying a necessary step that one must follow. E.g. If you're going to administer a drug to a patient and will need the patient's thyroid to somehow compensate for some otherwise bad side effects, then it is necessary for you to be sure (I.e. it is necessary to check) that the patient's thyroid is healthy. Of course it is necessary for the thyroid to be healthy, but the important thing here is that it is necessary for you to be sure that it is. That is how the sentence comes across to me, so other than the omission of "to", it reads okay. I also don't think that using "ensure" is better, as this suggests that you can do something about it if it is not. To ensure something means to actively make it happen, whereas "to be sure" suggests (to me at least) that it is a yes/no check. But much of what is right or not, of what reads well or not, is a matter of context, and sometimes it is just a matter of linguistic aesthetics.
appositiona Observations from Earth indicate that at the solar surface, the outward magnetic field is a strongest at the polar regions. Is the outward magnetic field an apposition which describes the solar surface?
Please pay more attention to grammar. "Wonder" is not a transitive verb. It cannot take a direct object. You have to say, "I wonder about the difference..." Both of these are acceptable. In formal written English, most editors would prefer the second version. After all, "somebody" is singular whereas "themselves" is plural, so that construction is, technically, illogical. Understand that we used to always use the masculine gender when referring to an unspecified person: It's not an expensive way for somebody to make himself feel good. Most of the European languages use this construction; it goes back to the Stone Age when all the leaders were male because they were stronger. But, starting in the 1960s, the feminist movement arose and women began to remind us that they are also important, and many of them are leaders too. We struggled for a long time to resolve this gender problem in our pronouns. People have used "he/she." That isn't too bad in writing but it's horrible in speech. They tried inventing a new pronoun like "heshe," which is too long, or "herm," which sounds too much like "him." So we use "they," which is confusing. The silliest example of this I've ever seen was a sign in a children's bathroom in a school: "After lunch, every child must wash their face." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The solution to this problem is for all of us to start speaking Chinese. Chinese has no gender. There is one pronoun, Ta, which means "he," "she," or "it." I don't see that example in the passage you quoted. I think you left something out. Once again, I ask you to PLEASE post your questions on the EXISTING THREAD, "Help with English." Please DO NOT START A NEW THREAD for every question. Just navigate to the very last post on that thread and click "REPLY." Thanks, F.R.
In this particular case, you can use either construction. But that is not true of all verbs. You shouldn't say, "My car has become rusted by the salt in the air because I live so close to the ocean." This is okay. Of course it is not correct because the phenomenon is not unknown. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The body slowly produces more red blood cells to trap more of the rare oxygen. When the Olympics were held in Mexico City in 1968, all of the American athletes were relocated to Denver for training, where the altitude is about the same as Mexico City. Their bodies were adapted to the high altitude before they arrived at the Olympic site.
No. The sun's surface is matter. The magnetic field is a force. The sentence means that the sun's magnetic field is stronger at the polar regions of the sun's surface than at all other locations on the sun's surface.
@Cyrus You could probably think of a million questions to ask, all at once, but Fraggle hasn't got that much time to devote to you. Stick to this thread, and post a new question maybe a couple of times a week. Try to apply the rules he gives you to as many different sentences as possible, so that you learn them thoroughly. It is very good that you are so keen to learn.
Thanks for the support, but I have (slightly) more time and interest in this than you give me credit for. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! CYRUS: The best way to do this is to ask just one question at a time. Then wait for the answer before you ask the next one. It will be easier for everyone to read if we only have one conversation in progress at a time. Thanks, F.R.
