Dear Rupert, Many thanks for today's lesson. It taught some non-conventional or exceptional grammar rules. The ways of conversation of the native speakers. I would request to keep it up. Thanks a lot once again.
Hi Rupert, I am little bit confused regarding the second grammatical structure. After prepositions, we should use article 'the' rather than using any possessive forms(my, your etc.). Is this rule applicable for all kinds of sentences? Or is this an exception to this particular phrase 'In the stomach'? If I say 1) He came to my house. 2) He threw the ball to my house. 3) I won't set foot in your house. 4) He insulted me in his/my house. 5) The police arrested him in his Store. I think these examples are correct. Another question not related to this topic. 6) a)"The guy took the boy to the hospital after being injured./6)b)After being injured, The guy took the boy to the hospital." Is this correct? I think I should say 7)a) " The guy took the boy to the hospital after boy's being injured./7)b) After boy's being injured, the guy took the boy to the hospital. Am I right? What is your opinion on all of the sentences (1-7)?
Hi Dan! Your sentences 1-5 are correct. The exception "in the + noun" is related to describing body parts where the subject is otherwise clear, but does not necessarily apply to other nouns. With 6, the issue is making sure the subject in the participle links correctly to the subject in the main clause. Perhaps a passive would achieve this? "After being injured, he was taken to hospital by someone".
Wow! Utterly Excellent! It was a very good trick. You explained everything to me very easily. I really enjoyed this class. She's as beautiful as her twin sister. I'm the phone owner. Thanks, Teacher Rupert.
Hi Rupert, your video was very impressive. I'm very interested in this particular example you cited : "If my friend arrives today, it would have been 10 days since her last visit". I'm confused how to analyze the logic of this sentence. (1) Does this sentence mean she arrived today or not ? "If she arrives today, .... " means there is a possibility that she arrives today, we still don't know whether or not she does. But "it would have been 10 days since her last visit" means a hypothetical statement in the past that was not fulfilled. So, how can you mix these two conflicting thoughts together ? (2) Is it correct to say the following sentence ? How would you explain the logic of this mixed structure ? "If she arrives today, she would bring good news". Please help me explain the logical thinking of these mixed conditional structures. I'm looking forward to your detailed explanations. Best regards,
Hi! Yes, it can appear confusing! Let me say a bit more. 1) The speaker begins by talking about a real possibility "If she arrives today" ... and then states what the gap between this visit and the last visit would be if the condition is fulfilled. Now in theory the speaker could have said "it will have been" to be more definite. But, because the situation is uncertain, there is a blurred boundary between whether the speaker should be speaking with certainty or hypothetically. The "if" part is a genuine possibility, so 1st conditional seems reasonable, but as the whole situation is uncertain, the speaker then decided to complete the sentence hypothetically. It's just an example of how, in reality, native speakers get to the end of the "if" clause before deciding how to complete the sentence, and are not necessarily bound by the 1st clause. 2) is a bit different, because "would" is used for present/future logical deduction and so there is no potential conflict with "if" + present tense
Hi Rupert, Thank you very very much for your excellent explanation. To perfect my understanding about this issue, please help me again with my following questions : You were saying that "will have been" is more definite/certain compared to "would have been". (1) Is this sentence grammatically correct, using "would" to express less certainty than using "will"? - I sent John a letter 2 days ago, he would have received it by now (= less certain than using "will have received"......). (2) Is the sentence grammatically correct, using "would" in the sense of logical deduction or prediction less certain than using "will" ? "If he studies hard, he would pass his exam tomorrow". I'd highly appreciate your reply to my above questions. Once again, thank you so much. Best regards,
I love grammar. But you lessons with mindboggling grammar make me nearly faint haha! Thank you very much for this rollercoster for brains! I have a quick question about the last sentense. Why there is not "out they're coming"? The action is going on in the picture. But the grammar tense is Present Simple, not Present Continuous. Why is that? Thank you!
Great question! I actually don't have an answer to that question. "Out they come" can definitely be used, but I've never heard anything like "Out they're coming" or "In they're going". I agree with your logic, though!
Different "from", "to" and "than" are very similar - it partly depends on where in the world you are (e.g. British people don't use "different than"), and some would prefer to use "from" to mean what distinguishes one thing from another (e.g. see them as apart) and some would use "to" in order to show a direct comparison (e.g. see them as different but near). But, there's no problem using any of them.
@EnglishwithRupert Oh that's terrific way of persuading everybody quite gently at the end of a day those depths of English language surely be fruitful for them I mean for everybody, oh please don't be doubtful ain't cajoling you!
People usually ask. Can I have some rice?. ,Not Can I have a rice. It would be even more grammatically correct to ask. May I have some rice?. "May" implies a request. "Can" refers to our physical ability to do something . Such fine distinctions are becoming increasingly rare today's parlance. In a declining culture elegance and finesse are quickly replaced by crude vulgarity.
There is definitely a trend to blend different registers of English nowadays - we used to separate these into formal and informal language, but (particularly in the USA) the informal register is becoming more and more dominant. I imagine the finer points of English will remain in the written form for our lifetimes, though. Thank you for your thoughtful comment!
If you never mind, I would like to convince you that ----------- 'Adjectives' is a wide area in the language; follow Mr. Rupert's all videos first. ------------ Another grammar point in brief 👇 * If you add the definite article 'THE' before the adjective, it definitely produces a plural meaning becoming a noun as in The poor( = the poor people ) • the rich = rich people • the kind= kind people • the ugly = ugly ones etc. ---------- Further Note that Not 'the poors or the kinds' Thanks 🎉
... hi teacher ... nouns arranged into a chain of adjectives (your Item 7), as especially popular in technical texts, can be a real nuisance to translators ... without expert knowledge an expression like "the ground fault circuit interrupter protection" can by misinterpreted in several ways ... please, remove this practice from English asap ... :-) ... thank you so very much ...
Mr .Rupert ,your lesson has challenged me beyond measure! You have left me completely speechless!
Keep it up.
Thank you! My work is complete if I am able to stretch minds like yours 😁
Sir,you present hidden corners of English Language which makes you a unique teacher of its own type.
Once again, so many thanks for your encouraging comments. Watch out for my extra videos this weekend 😉
Dear Rupert, Many thanks for today's lesson. It taught some non-conventional or exceptional grammar rules. The ways of conversation of the native speakers. I would request to keep it up. Thanks a lot once again.
Thanks! Your kind comments mean a lot to me 👍😁
Thank you !
We definitely need more of this useful advanced content
I'm glad this is the kind of thing you wanted to view. I'll try to keep the videos coming 👍😁
Hi Rupert,
I am little bit confused regarding the second grammatical structure.
After prepositions, we should use article 'the' rather than using any possessive forms(my, your etc.). Is this rule applicable for all kinds of sentences? Or is this an exception to this particular phrase 'In the stomach'?
If I say 1) He came to my house.
2) He threw the ball to my house.
3) I won't set foot in your house.
4) He insulted me in his/my house.
5) The police arrested him in his Store.
I think these examples are correct.
Another question not related to this topic. 6) a)"The guy took the boy to the hospital after being injured./6)b)After being injured, The guy took the boy to the hospital." Is this correct?
I think I should say 7)a) " The guy took the boy to the hospital after boy's being injured./7)b) After boy's being injured, the guy took the boy to the hospital. Am I right? What is your opinion on all of the sentences (1-7)?
Hi Dan!
Your sentences 1-5 are correct. The exception "in the + noun" is related to describing body parts where the subject is otherwise clear, but does not necessarily apply to other nouns.
With 6, the issue is making sure the subject in the participle links correctly to the subject in the main clause. Perhaps a passive would achieve this? "After being injured, he was taken to hospital by someone".
This is incredible! I really appreciate this video.
Thanks for letting me know the video helped you 👍🙂
Great video ❤
Waiting for video on adverbs and their placement in a sentence.
Thanks! Have you seen this video I produced on adverbs? th-cam.com/video/Lwhq2ryiW5o/w-d-xo.html
@@EnglishwithRupertThanks a million ❤️
Excellent lessons,keep it up,sir
Thanks! I appreciate the kind comment 🙂
Wow! Utterly Excellent! It was a very good trick. You explained everything to me very easily. I really enjoyed this class.
She's as beautiful as her twin sister.
I'm the phone owner.
Thanks, Teacher Rupert.
It's great to hear you enjoyed it so much 😁👍
Thank you ❤
It's a pleasure to be helpful 🙂
Hi Rupert, your video was very impressive. I'm very interested in this particular example you cited :
"If my friend arrives today, it would have been 10 days since her last visit".
I'm confused how to analyze the logic of this sentence.
(1) Does this sentence mean she arrived today or not ?
"If she arrives today, .... " means there is a possibility that she arrives today, we still don't know whether or not she does. But "it would have been 10 days since her last visit" means a hypothetical statement in the past that was not fulfilled. So, how can you mix these two conflicting thoughts together ?
(2) Is it correct to say the following sentence ?
How would you explain the logic of this mixed structure ?
"If she arrives today, she would bring good news".
Please help me explain the logical thinking of these mixed conditional structures.
I'm looking forward to your detailed explanations.
Best regards,
Hi! Yes, it can appear confusing! Let me say a bit more.
1) The speaker begins by talking about a real possibility "If she arrives today" ... and then states what the gap between this visit and the last visit would be if the condition is fulfilled. Now in theory the speaker could have said "it will have been" to be more definite. But, because the situation is uncertain, there is a blurred boundary between whether the speaker should be speaking with certainty or hypothetically. The "if" part is a genuine possibility, so 1st conditional seems reasonable, but as the whole situation is uncertain, the speaker then decided to complete the sentence hypothetically.
It's just an example of how, in reality, native speakers get to the end of the "if" clause before deciding how to complete the sentence, and are not necessarily bound by the 1st clause.
2) is a bit different, because "would" is used for present/future logical deduction and so there is no potential conflict with "if" + present tense
Hi Rupert,
Thank you very very much for your excellent explanation. To perfect my understanding about this issue, please help me again with my following questions :
You were saying that "will have been" is more definite/certain compared to "would have been".
(1) Is this sentence grammatically correct, using "would" to express less certainty than using "will"?
- I sent John a letter 2 days ago, he would have received it by now (= less certain than using "will have received"......).
(2) Is the sentence grammatically correct, using "would" in the sense of logical deduction or prediction less certain than using "will" ?
"If he studies hard, he would pass his exam tomorrow".
I'd highly appreciate your reply to my above questions. Once again, thank you so much.
Best regards,
I like your teaching.
You teach English from the bottom of your heart.
I have 60 most important tenses usages.
Thanks for the lovely comment 🙂👍👍
I think for the imperative sentence you should've mention that the noun is implied (you) go play
Yes, you are right, but that's the nature of all imperative sentences - the subject is implied but not stated 🙂
I love grammar. But you lessons with mindboggling grammar make me nearly faint haha! Thank you very much for this rollercoster for brains!
I have a quick question about the last sentense. Why there is not "out they're coming"? The action is going on in the picture. But the grammar tense is Present Simple, not Present Continuous. Why is that?
Thank you!
Great question! I actually don't have an answer to that question. "Out they come" can definitely be used, but I've never heard anything like "Out they're coming" or "In they're going". I agree with your logic, though!
@@EnglishwithRupert Thank you very much!
Well explained....thank u....but why r u saying this is a rice that is different to? Why not different from?
Different "from", "to" and "than" are very similar - it partly depends on where in the world you are (e.g. British people don't use "different than"), and some would prefer to use "from" to mean what distinguishes one thing from another (e.g. see them as apart) and some would use "to" in order to show a direct comparison (e.g. see them as different but near). But, there's no problem using any of them.
That's super duper lesson im assuring myself about your determined and assertive character 😊😊😊😅😅😅?
Thanks! I do enjoy the challenge of uncovering the depths of the English language for others to learn from 😁
@EnglishwithRupert Oh that's terrific way of persuading everybody quite gently at the end of a day those depths of English language surely be fruitful for them I mean for everybody, oh please don't be doubtful ain't cajoling you!
I liked this lesson.
I'm really glad you liked the lesson!
It's funny about the conditionals. If there's anything against the rules, we just simply say: It's a mixed conditional, it's OK.
That's sort of true! Thanks for your insightful comment!
People usually ask. Can I have some rice?. ,Not Can I have a rice. It would be even more grammatically correct to ask. May I have some rice?. "May" implies a request. "Can" refers to our physical ability to do something . Such fine distinctions are becoming increasingly rare today's parlance. In a declining culture elegance and finesse are quickly replaced by crude vulgarity.
There is definitely a trend to blend different registers of English nowadays - we used to separate these into formal and informal language, but (particularly in the USA) the informal register is becoming more and more dominant. I imagine the finer points of English will remain in the written form for our lifetimes, though. Thank you for your thoughtful comment!
The bad, the ugly,and the kind are these adjectives singular or plural thanks in advance
Hi! They could be used with singular or plural nouns (a bad person, bad people)
If you never mind, I would like to convince you that
-----------
'Adjectives' is a wide area in the language; follow Mr. Rupert's all videos first.
------------
Another grammar point in brief 👇
* If you add the definite article 'THE' before the adjective, it definitely produces a plural meaning becoming a noun as in The poor( = the poor people )
• the rich = rich people
• the kind= kind people
• the ugly = ugly ones
etc.
----------
Further Note that
Not 'the poors or the kinds'
Thanks 🎉
Antidepressants < Rupert's lessons
I'm so glad my videos have lifted your spirits 😁👍
😊😊👍👍
... hi teacher ... nouns arranged into a chain of adjectives (your Item 7), as especially popular in technical texts, can be a real nuisance to translators ... without expert knowledge an expression like "the ground fault circuit interrupter protection" can by misinterpreted in several ways ... please, remove this practice from English asap ... :-) ... thank you so very much ...
Oh dear! I feel your pain! I don't know if there's a way to start a campaign to ban this, but if there is, I'll join in 😂😂
@@EnglishwithRupert ... Yes! Plain English rules! ...