Teacher Discussion Forums

The point is that 'remoteness' explains nearly every difference in usage between the 'Present' and the 'Past'. Sure you can't use 'remoteness' to predict usage, but all explanations of the different use of the two tenses is encapsulated within the context. Remember that tenses, like aspects, do not ...

After the section on verbs, I moved on to modals, but I had more trouble understanding Lewis's explanation of modals That's because his idea of a core meaning for each modal is rubbish. You can't say "Gave me a drink please", and if it was only about "remoteness" there is no good reason why. 'Give'...

In Spanish it could be first language interference.

Debes visitar el museo; és muy bonito.

I had a colleague who had a whole class of anally-retentive students. Five minutes into the lesson 90% of them would say they wanted to go to the toilet and never come back.

There's no such thing as the subjective case and the objective case. There are subject pronouns and object pronouns, and nominative, accusative & dative cases.

Yes. There are some interesting things here. The phrase is the same in French 'C'est moi.' 'Me' is the emphatic pronoun but in many variants 'I', is, or is becoming, the emphatic pronoun. The Spanish are going to ask you why you don't say 'I am I/me" as the first person complement requires a first p...

English spelling was fairly well-codified by the end of Dryden's time, but it was not until the publication of Johnson's and Webster's dictionaries that there was a tool that allowed for total standardization.

I take it from the style employed that SteveJones123 is our own dear friend, getting a nod in the language log? stevejones123 is the moniker I use to post in The Guardian . I'd registered as stevejones back in 1999 but had lost both the password and the email address I'd used to register. As I'd al...

'It' is a dummy subject. What's the debate?

The aversion to plural verb + singular complement seems much less than that to singular verb + plural complement.

Like you I would always recast singular verb + plural complement sentences.

Singular subject and plural predicate. As ouyang says you come unstuck either way.

I think what rules here is proximity.
The evidence was the hundreds of bloody handprints left at the scene.
The evidence that led to his conviction were the hundreds of bloody handprints left at the scene.

I wouldn't say either are four-part phrasal verbs
I would parse both sentences as phrasal verb (come in/piss off) + adverbial.

I think you're forgetting the reason for the double genitive here. Much to the disappointment of one of my Spanish students, you can't use 'of' as an alternative to the possessive in many cases in English. These examples are wrong *The trousers of John *The finger of my wife The 'of' in a friend of ...

Sorry to be a pain, but can I ask how others interpreted Lloyd there? The phrase convoluted and self-strangled does tend to back you up but without access to the whole article we can't say exactly what he is referring to. I would note that the passage dates back more than fifty years. From my exper...

proceeded to pull out your M-W and shoot from the hip like a bull in a china shop, recklessly quoting their evidence to prove your point. The things you disapprove of evidently don't include mixed metaphors. I guess the M-W has been found in error then, along with Fluffy...again. I wonder why Fluff...