English: Is this sentence grammatically correct?
1."If I were in that situation, I would suffer even A after long time has PASSED". 2. When ONE of my american friends finishes his homework very early everytime, I tell him "you are so fast!". Is this right? or should I say "you are so quick!"? 3. "Hang in there one more week" Okay put corrections in capitals but 2 is very bad use of the language, a teacher would call it clumsy. the word "very" isn't needed -- you could use QUICKLY or SO QUICKLY instead of "very early" try this 2. When ONE of my american friends finishes his homework early every time, I tell him "you are so fast!". Is this right? or should I say "you are so quick!"? to answer the question , both are fine in spoken English Though quick would be better
Is this sentence grammatically correct in English?
It is not a complete sentence. It has a subject (person) but it doesn't have a verb. Perhaps you mean to say "He is a person with an unusual past." In this sentence, "He" is the subject and "is" is the verb.
Which sentence is grammatically correct in English?
both are grammatically correct. HAD BEEN working stipulates that she was actually employed as a secretary at the time she switched to computer programming. HAD WORKED does not specify that she was working at the time of the switch, only that she, in a previous time, worked as a secretary.
Which sentence is grammatically correct in English?
The word 'rather' can be used too ways. It usually means 'in preference to'--like 'I'd rather have tea than coffee'. But also in British English (not so much in American English) it can mean 'very'. As in 'he's rather tall'. When you say 'rather silly than funny', while that's technically correct grammar, it's not clear in which sense you mean the word 'rather'. If you say 'silly rather than funny' it's clear you mean more silly than funny. EDIT - Excuse me, I mean it can be used TWO ways, not too ways.
Is this sentence grammatically correct?
The first thing to note is the sentence is missing a few words to round out the overall direction of the sense. See the suggested amendment below.The second is the sentence is crying out for splitting into two separate sentences. There are multiple blocks of 'meaningfulness' and they put the original sentence structure in danger of being misinterpreted. If a high-level native English speaker like me could misinterpret, then you do the math it’s going to be hard for the less proficient.Other than that, you should put the thing in more regular English phraseology first — it’s ultimately pointless to fix grammar when the phraseology is ‘problematic.’The original:—“Voters voted in high stake elections that could shift the power within the hardline-controlled Islamic elites by ushering in a reformist comeback or help conservatives tighten their grip on power.”Suggested amendment:—“The balance of power for the Islamic elites and hardliners rides on the high-stakes elections. Voting could usher in a reformist comeback, or potentially help drive the conservatives to tighten their grip on power even further.”There! Recast the thing from another angle, and you could avoid futzing around over ‘help’ vs. ‘helping.’Thanks for the A2A.