MSN: Brockton students do 'amazing job' arguing before judge in mock trial
I'm having difficulty understanding when to use students' vs students. I know you use students' when you're talking about more than one student. For example: "The students' homeworks were marked".
She has developed skills in identifying problems from constantly analyzing student’s/students' language use. Hi, what is the factor in this sentence that determines the plurality if she has taught numerous students for a long period but taught one student at a time?
Please have this post focus on the situations relevant to students or other countable noun plural; the different between "all of the time" and "all the time" please see ("all of the time" vs. "all the time" when referring to situations); other discussion related to time, please take a loot at here.
grammar - "All students" vs. "All the students" - English Language ...
Which one is correct? "There is no student in the class" "There are no students in the class" Thanks
Are there other names for students according to their year - except of ...
1 "All the students" and "all of the students" mean the same thing regardless of context. When you qualify all three with "in the school", they become interchangeable. But without that qualifier, "all students" would refer to all students everywhere, and the other two would refer to some previously specified group of students.
articles - Is there any difference between "all students", "all the ...
For a list, use "Student Names" or "Students' Names". Remember that nouns can function as adjectives in English. If you want to show group possession, you put an apostrophe after the "s". The second way is considered a fancier way of writing it since most native English speakers rarely use the plural-possessive apostrophe even though it's well-accepted. For a table-column heading, use "Student ...
But grammatically, there is a difference. Nurdug's "one of the students' name" = " {one of the students}' name". Your "one of the students' names" = "one of {the students' names} ". In informal conversation, we might conceivably use nurdug's formulation, because the context would make it clear what we were talking about.
"There were students on the bus" ~ "There were no students on the bus". The negator "no" (a negative determiner) is of course required with the latter, but with positive plural NPs, a determiner is optional. So you can say "there were twenty students on the bus" (quantified), or "there were students on the bus" (unquantified). You can also say "There was a student on the bus" and the negative ...
"There was no student" or "There were no students"? Which is correct?
The student's book is a book which belongs to the student. The student book may be either a book about/intended for the specific student or a book about/intended for students generally.
Closed 1 year ago. Are these called columns of students or vertical rows of students? If they are called neither, what are they called then in AmE? I have circled the vertical rows of students in blue to know the thing whose name I am looking for.
Are these called "columns" of students or "vertical rows" of students ...
Is my understanding correct that I can use "none of them" with a plural verb when meaning "not any of them", for example, "none of these students speak English".
They're all wrong because "always" should be before the verb. "How he always argues with me" or "how he's always arguing with me" would be the most usual answers.
'Arguing' as a noun is the process generally. Only 'argument' can be used for a specific one that lasts ten minutes or happened twice on Tuesday, so you would only want a plural for 'argument'.
All of them are correct. The first and the third mean much the same. If there's a difference it could be that the third suggests you've been arguing about different things, while the first doesn't have that same suggestion. The second has a slightly different meaning. Please tell us your context. Have the arguments stopped? Are they likely to continue?
have been arguing a lot vs. have had a lot of arguments vs. have been ...
"Arguing" is more general in meaning. It refers to any sort of prolonged verbal disagreement. "Bickering" specifically refers to arguing over minor matters, or engaging in pointless, petty arguments. Bickering is a certain form of arguing.
Would there be any differences in meaning when the first part of the sentence (1) is changed from “There's no arguing” to “It’s impossible to argue”? (1)There's no arguing with my wife on how many children to have.
Ah, yes, it seems to be. On the face of it, it seems to have the opposite of the intended meaning. 'There is no argument that' normally means (or to me normally means) that it is obviously true; there is no point arguing against it. We are all agreed that these constructs are unworthy. However, they need it to mean that no reasonable person could make an argument for it: no-one would say these ...
He was a brilliant talker, and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive. The others said of Squealer that he could turn black into white" My try is: "Los otros (animales) decían de Squealer que podía hacer del blanco negro (ser super persuasivo)"
One usage of "present continuous " is to complain about things or people. My question is : Is it necessary to use an adverb of frequency in this case? So would it be OK if I complain of my neighbors like this: They are arguing. Or They are having parties. Or I necessarily need an adverb. And...
The latest Wall Street Journal/College Pulse rankings are out and Stanford returns to the top of this list for the first time since the 2017 rankings. Unlike other school rankings, this list emphasizes one point: How well did the college prepare students for financial success? More than any other factor, it rewards the boost an institution provides to its graduates’ salaries, beyond an ...