Neither of the sentences is grammatically correct. I’ll analyze them and recommend alternatives. In general, combining negations with different conjunctions leads to really dicey grammatical and logical situations. The best policy is to keep it simple by using as few negations as possible.In both sentences: The ‘for’ that occurs before ‘writing’ and the ‘for’ that occurs before ‘waiting’ are both ungrammatical and must be omitted. The comma should also be omitted since there’s no subordinate relation, and it separates the subject ‘Nobody’ from part of the predicate. You might also consider replacing ‘answers’ with ‘replies’.Sentence 1: Nobody wants to spend time either for writing the letters, or for waiting for the answers.I take this sentence to be making the assertion that there is no one who wants to spend time both writing the letters and waiting for the answers (presumably the answers to the letters). This is a bit tricky since it is an occasion where the disjunction ‘or’ can be replaced by the conjunction ‘and’ without loss of meaning.Suggested alternatives to sentence 1:1′: Nobody wants to spend time either writing the letters or waiting for the answers.1′′: Nobody wants to spend time writing the letters or waiting for the answers. (‘either’ can be omitted)1′′′: Nobody wants to spend time writing the letters and waiting for the answers. (I suspect this is the clearest version of what you’re aiming at.)Sentence 2: Nobody wants to spend time neither for writing the letters, nor for waiting for the answers.Logically speaking, this sentence is stating there is no one who wants to spend time both not writing the letters and not waiting for the replies. That’s a mouthful, so I’ll clean it up. The sentence is stating that everyone wants to spend time writing the letters or waiting for the answers, or both.Suggested alternative to sentence 2:2′: Everybody wants to spend time either writing the letters or waiting for the answers, or both.
What would the correct form of this sentence?
Which of these sentences would be more grammatically correct? (1) So it can be said that science is just as evil, if not more, than religion. (2) So it can be said that science is just as evil, if not more, as religion. I'm confused about whether or not I should use than or as because when i take out the series of words within the parentheses "as" sounds like it would be more grammatically correct and when I leave the sentence as it is "than" sounds like its more more grammatically correct. Thanks in advance.
Theses english sentences are correct?
Hello, Well it is understandable but not grammatically perfect. Are you french? it would be like me saying je suis chaud if i mean j'ai chaud, if you don't know french ignore that little bit. Are these english sentences correct? Hello, Can you tell me if this is written in correct english or not: During our first entry, you saw an error in the password. This is the french touch. We then renewed our invitation with the correct password. Thank you.
For such a simple, straightforward sentence like this, it’s overall better and more natural-sounding to remove the word “both”:—The two cities are busy and have too many people.You already have the word “two” to begin with, so the sentence has the necessary implication that ‘busy’ and ‘too many people’ apply to both of them.If you feel there is a compelling need to have the word ‘both’ somewhere in the sentence, then ask yourself if the overall meaning differs among these variations:—The two cities are both busy and have too many people.The two cities are busy and both have too many people.The two cities are both busy and both have too many people.Both cities are busy and have too many people.As you can see, variations 1–3 are saying the same thing as the one without ‘both.’The only practically workable variation is #4.Thanks for the A2A.
Not so fast. The sentence can be understood in more than one way. It’s possible that No. 2 is also correct. In No. 1, you assume a compound subject, “restaurants” and “catering company,” which requires a plural verb. So far so good. Imagine, however, that there is just one company, one that owns/manages restaurants and offers catering services. “Company” becomes the subject and requires a singular verb: “Company keeps you busy.” “Restaurants and catering” modify “company.” As an editor, I would have to query the author to determine the meaning, if it wasn't already clear from the wider context. If No. 2 was tipped as being correct, I would order and/or beg the author to rephrase because, clearly, that formulation can be misunderstood. No. 3 is the same as No. 1 and can be corrected by changing “keeps” to “keep.” No. 4 is the same as No. 2 and can also be corrected by changing “keeps” to “keep.”
Which of these sentences is correct?
Both are correct and mean the same. Which is better? That depends on how the sentence 'flows'. Example: 1. Tears began falling again when she heard the sad story. 2. When she heard the sad story, the tears began falling again. 1. Her tears - 'Her' is redundant (not necessary) because 'she' is in the sentence later. 2. 'the' may be used here because attention is drawn to the fact that the story is 'sad'. Use 'the' especially if she has cried about the story before in your article, story, or book. However, both are correct, the choice is yours.
What is the correct possessive form of these sentences? The encyclicals of the popes. The shirt of the boy. Th?
Benedictines' fields. Benedictines is a plural noun`, representing a team of priests from that order. The possessive style of a noun ending in s is to function the apostrophe after the s. Whale's abdomen. Whale is singular, so we upload the apostrophe and the s.
The original question is:What would be the correct form of these sentences?1: I talked to her just now.2: if he had gone to chine he had become a good businessman.3: why he gets up early in the morning?4: I wish that I will help the needy to stand on their feet.5: It is time we will prepare for the exam.6: The patient died before the doctor arrived.7: You had better to go to home.8: The criminal was hung on the charge of murder.9: The stream has over flown its banks.10: Has she visited you last day? Yes, she has.11: If he was here, he would be as wise as he was dueing the war.12: The thought that the plan would be succeeded.13: When I shall see her I will deliver her your gift.14: I shall not not come here unless you will not call me(.15: If he had not died, he would grow up to be a murderer.16: Until you remain idle you will make no progress.17: I shall not come here unless you will not call me.18: We watched the lambs gamble on the green.19: He hadn't ought to have spokenAnswer:(This is correct as written.)If he had gone to China, he would have become a good businessman.Why does he get up early in the morning?I wish that I could help the needy to stand on their feet.It is time that we prepare for the exam.(This is correct as written.)You had better go home.The criminal was hanged on the charge of murder.The stream has overflowed its banks.Has she visited you today? Yes, she has.If he were here, he would be as wise as he was during the war.The thought was that the plan would succeed.When I see her I will deliver your gift to her.I shall not not come here if you do not call me.If he had not died, he would have grown up to be a murderer.As long as you remain idle you will make no progress.I shall not come here unless you call me.We watched the lambs gambol on the green.He shouldn’t have spoken
Are these sentence correct?
The sentences are correct, but believe it or not, some are more correct than others. They DO NOT have the same meaning. 1 and 2 are both correct, and could have the same meaning, but may not. The first one is "elliptical," which means that some of the words have been left out, but you can infer what is meant. The missing words could be several possibilities: repairs which were carried out; repairs which have been carried out; repairs which are carried out; are being carried out. Since you don't know which auxiliary verb form is missing, so can't say with certainty what the tense is. But they are both correct. 2 and 3 might seem to mean the same thing, but they don't. In #2, the repairs are done on a frequent or regular basis, ongoingly on the motorway, and therefore delays could be expected. But in #3, the repairs are being carried out on the motorway at the present moment, or at the present time. There is no indication that repairs are made on the motorway on an ongoing basis. Since repairs are occurring now, and that is unusual, delays would be expected. The sentence is grammatically allowable. 4 - is referring to repairs which were carried out on the motorway, and now they are finished. The implication is that something about the repairs themselves may result in traffic delays. The sentence conforms to grammatical conventions. 5 - In the last one, the repairs were being carried out recently, but for a finite period of time. This one is questionable as pertains to correctness. The repairs were carried out and now they are done. How could they delay traffic? This is another one where the repairs or resultant condition of the road become the problem for traffic.
Which is correct of these sentences?
Depends. You will not be surprised to know that there are differences between American English and British English. I assume you are using the word "staff" as in hotel employees. Americans say that hotel staff is singular. On the other hand, the British say that hotel staff is plural. #1 is correct in England. #2 is correct in the US. Clear as mud?