Which is grammatically correct?
I can't believe so many people don't know the distinction between "that" and "which." "Across the mighty river that bears your stately name" is correct. If you wanted to use "which," it would need to be in a separate clause, separated by a comma, thus: "Across the mighty river, which bears your stately name." Those people who are "correcting" your spelling to "bares" need to shut up and buy a dictionary. Edit: I'm appalled that of 12 answers, mine is the only correct one, but it is. Here, check for yourself: http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/whoVwhVt.asp "That" begins a restrictive clause. Essentially it is saying, "I refer to the river named Ohio," to distinguish it from other rivers with different names. "Which" begins a nonrestrictive clause. It assumes we already know which river is being discussed, and describes one of its attributes - its name. So, essentially: "This particular river is called Ohio." Nonrestrictive clauses take commas; restrictive clauses don't. Within the context of the verse, I think "which" is the better choice. Technically, this makes the line grammatically incorrect. Though the comma is necessary, the poet may have chosen to omit it to preserve the poem's rhythm. Poetic license, don'tcha know. ;)
Which one is grammatically correct?
Both of them seem correct to me. However, you made a mistake by placing the “was” in the incorrect order in the first statement.Let’s analyze it: When you say: “She asked him what was it that made him so much stronger than any other man” — you used “what was it”, it means you wrote it in the question form, therefore, since you use ‘was’ before the subject ‘it’ you are declaring that the statement is in the question form; which is made by placing the to be verb in front of the subject:He was there - affirmative; He wasn’t there - negative; Was he there? - question; Was he not there? - negative question.Since you wrote it in the question form, you should have added a “?” in the end of the sentence.“She asked him what it was that made him so much stronger than any other man”.This statement seems to fit more adequate, since you wrote it in the affirmation form; which is made by placing the verb to be after the subject — “what it was”.Therefore, I upvote the second statement, seems more adequate in my point of view, as you wrote in the affirmation form and didn’t add any “?”. So it turns out being the right one.
Which one is correct grammatically?
It would be the first in, at least, American English. Collective nouns like everybody/everyone take the third person singular form.
'I too or me too', which is grammatically correct?
The original question is:'I too' or 'me too', which is grammatically correct?Answer:They are both grammatically correct, but each in its appropriate place. In the following examples, the portion of the sentence that is not stated is understood or implied."I [am happy] too" is proper when given in response to a sentence such as "I am happy.""[Toss it to] Me too" is proper when given in response to a sentence such as "Please toss the ball to me."
Is "How's you?" grammatically correct?
Since ‘is’ is a form of the verb ‘be’, so to quote the great Chandler Bing: “Could it be more wrong?” :DI'm so glad somebody put up this query! Many thanks ! ‘How’s you?’ is another one of pop culture’s grammatical evils! As a grammar coach, it infuriates me inside (albeit I maintain a calm countenance on the surface :p) to have myself enquired after in such fashion!‘How’s you?’ is essentially the contraction for ‘How is you ?’ Stating the universally known here, that the pronoun ‘you’ never works with ‘is’, making the usage ‘How’s you?’ absolutely wrong and invalid ! Whatever happened to good old ‘How are you?’ that's been around for as long as can be remembered ?‘You’ as a pronoun in English is always given plural treatment. Hence the combinations of you with forms of be in the present and past tense are as follows :Present tense :You + arePast tense :You + wereThe forms ‘is’ and ‘was’ find no usage in conjunction with ‘you’ in legitimate grammar except for literature and motion pictures where the characters are deliberately made to use the combination in their speech to establish their rural or uneducated background.
Which is grammatically correct? Mr & Mrs .......... or Mrs & Mr ...........?
Mr. & Mrs. because the man is like "in charge" of the household and the wife (normally) takes his last name So it'd be like Mr. & Mrs. [Man's name here]
Is “he is risen” grammatically correct?
In Early Modern English be was often used to form the past perfect for intransitive verbs but have was used with transitive.Some examples of what this would look like if it were still the case in Modern English:I am stood on the mountain (no direct object).We are driven to the store already (no direct object).I have seen the cat.We have bought three pancakes.Both 1 and 2 are very odd in Modern English dialects. This is why ‘he is risen’ sounds very weird.I would say it was grammatically correct five hundred years ago, and people still use it to sound archaic and add authority to things, especially in religious texts and in fantasy writing. It is definitely marked.This usage is basically using Early Modern English as a Sacred/liturgical language or even Magical language. Many cultures preserve archaic things in holy writing or in myths and fantasy, not just English. Historically, an archaic Slavic language Old Church Slavonic was used in Eastern Orthodox churches for centuries after it evolved into Bulgarian and Macedonian. Latin was used in a similar way, and before Christianity and Islam spread to Mesopotamia, Akkadian, Sumerian and numerous other ancient extinct languages were used in the religions of those areas.Using be with an intransitive still works marginally for ‘go’ in many dialects of American English including my own.I can write:‘If you are reading this then I am gone to the store already.’I can also imagine saying something like that.I think this is fossilised with ‘go’ though as I would say that with hardly any other verb.