Which one is grammatically correct? "He can't understand X" or "He can't understands X" ?
The first one is correct (“He can’t understand [X]”).If interested in more details, read on:“Can”/”can’t” are modal verbs, and such verbs are different from ordinary verbs. They never change form, and the verbs — the ones that go with them — are always in the infinitive.Let’ compare 2 sets of sentences, using the verb “dance”:“I dance”“You dance”“She dances”“We dance”“They dance”Notice that there’s an ‘s’ added to “dance”, for the third-person singular (“She” in this case).Now, here’s a set that a modal verb (“can” in this case):“I can dance.”“You can dance.”“She can dance.”“We can dance.”“They can dance.”Notice how “dance” does NOT have an ‘s’ added to it in any of the sentences (not even for the third-person singular). The modal verb never gets an ‘s’ added, either.For your information, here are some other modal verbs:shouldwouldmaymightwillcouldshallmustTheir negations (shouldn’t, wouldn’t, etc.), are modal verbs, too).
Is this grammatically correct, “I can't understand who you are”?
The trouble with “I can’t understand who you are.” is not grammatical.The statement sounds awkward because of the similarity between “know” and “understand”. It is much more common to say “I don’t know who you are” than “I don’t understand who you are”.What is the difference between “know” and “understand”?The verb “to know” is usually used with general facts, information, and data.The verb “to understand” is usually used at a deeper level, for processes, techniques, and things that are explained.For example:“I know your name.” - This statement means that the data of your name is in my mind.“I understand your name.” - This statement means that I know the meaning of your name, not just the name as individual data.“I know his name, but I don’t understand it.” - This implies that the name may be in another language or form that is not understood at a deeper level, even if it is known on the surface.For the sentence: “I can’t understand who you are”, we have the feeling that I have tried to explain my connection to you, but that explanation has not made sense. Perhaps I am a second cousin of a great aunt on your brother’s ex-wife’s side of the family.It is possible to use this sentence, but it is not commonly used in a normal situation.
Which sentence is grammatically correct, "Do you understand what he says", "Do you understand what he say"?
‘Do you understand what is he saying?’Or‘Do you undersatnd what he says?’Are both correct depending on the context they are being used.
Is it grammatically correct to say, "I am sorry if I can't understand what you are saying"?
My answer is from the perspective of British English. American English is merely a collection of words plucked randomly from a poorly printed dictionary and so the concept of “grammatically correct" has no meaning;If that is the complete sentence then, no, it is NOT good English to say “I'm sorry if I can't interpret your actions.”.(Ignoring the apostrophe in “action's", since that is wrong for other reasons.)In English, “I am sorry" can be an apology or can be offering sympathy: “I am sorry for hitting you.” or “I am sorry that your girlfriend dumped you.”.In the example you gave, it is obviously an apology but the “if" indicates that you do not know whether you are interpreting their actions correctly or not.In this case, you should say “I'm sorry that I can't interpret your actions.” or “I'm sorry, but I can't interpret your actions.”. (The second version is maybe half sympathy rather than being all apology; as if I were saying “I'd love to be able to interpret your actions but they seem completely bonkers to me so it isn't my fault that I cannot understand them…”.)However, if the original text were just the start of the sentence, then it might be grammatically correct after all. For example “I'm sorry if I can't interpret your actions as anything other than offensive, but I demand that you apologize !”. In this case, the “Sorry" is not really apology or sympathy… more, it is a way to express reluctance at having to correct another person's behaviour.
Is "I am not quite understanding" grammatically correct?
Understanding is an adjective to understand is a verb Understanding is a noun as well If you write " I am not quite understanding it means, that you have very little understanding for others.
Which is grammatically correct, "she doesn't understand what you said" or "she doesn't understand what do you say"?
When a question is inside a statement like SHE DOESN’T UNDERSTAND, it does not have question word order with the auxiliary (DO in this case) before the subject (YOU in this sentence). SHE DOESN’T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID is correct. WHAT DO YOU SAY is a question, and you can’t just add it to a statement like SHE DOESN’T UNDERSTAND.
Is this sentence correct? : "I am not understanding what you have been teaching?"?
It would be better to say 'I have not understood what your have been teaching', or 'I do not understand what you have been teaching'. I can't quite explain why, but in this sentence 'I am not understanding' sounds foreign, although the meaning is clear.
Is the word "incapable" grammatically correct in these two sentences?
Yes. But it's strange to use the word 'listening' in that sentence. If you have ears, you can listen. The problem is that you can't understand what you are listening to. (Remember 'listen' needs 'to'.) It should be "I am incapable of understanding complex English." If you want to make it clear that you mean listening and not reading, you can say "I am incapable of understanding complex spoken English."