QUESTIONS - GRAMMAR 2007

FEET

'Feet' is an example of a measurement for height, length and distance. 'Feet' is a non-metric measure, unlike 'metres' and 'centimetres' which are metric. Other non-metric measures, which we can use for distance, are: 'inches', 'yards' and 'miles'. It's a mile from my house to the centre of York, so it only takes me 20 minutes to walk there. Other non-metric measures, which we use for weight, are: 'ounces', 'pounds', 'stones' and 'tons'. I weigh fourteen stones, seven pounds. That's fourteen and a half stone! I really need to go on a diet.

LOOK FORWARD TO, AGREE TO and OBJECT TO

LOOK FORWARD TO Look forward to something = anticipate something with interest Look forward to is one of the many phrasal verbs in English in which an adverbial particle (forward) as well as a preposition (to) is combined with the stem verb to signify a particular meaning. What we are look forward to can be exemplified as either as a noun phrase or as a verb-phrase with an -ing pattern. Jill says she's not looking forward to Jack's party next weekend. I very much look forward to meeting you soon. They're looking forward to joining their children in Australia There are many such three-part verbs, e.g.: look back on = think back to put up with = tolerate come down with = fall ill with There are a number of instances where such verbs end with the preposition to, e.g.: face up to = confront get round to = do something after some delay get down to = concentrate on Note that in such instances to is not part of any infinitive phrase. It is an integral part of the verb. And whatever it is that face up to or get down to is normally expressed as either a noun phrase or as a verb phrase with an -ing pattern: I must get round to cleaning my car next weekend. And I must get down to reading Jack's article which he sent me two weeks ago I must face up to the fact that I'm never going to be promoted in this organisation. Note that when verbs follow prepositions (any prepositions) the V-ing form is normally used, not the to-infinitive pattern: I managed to finish reading Jack's article by staying up till midnight. He's talking about getting it published in National Geographic magazine. Instead of going on holiday last summer, he undertook this arduous trip up the Amazon. AGREE TO There is a complication in your example, Jolie, where both the -ing form and the to-inifnitive pattern appear possible: I cannot agree to share / to sharing an office with Ben. In no way can I agree to sharing / to share an office with Ben The complication arises because there are two different forms of pretty much the same verbagree and agree to. If we are using the phrasal verb, agree to, the -ing pattern is more likely. If we are using the non-phrasal verb, agree, the to-infinitive pattern is imperative. Compare the following: What have you agreed? We've agreed to tidy our rooms when we get up, to clear the dishes from the table after eating and not to go out until we've finished our homework. What have you agreed to? We've agreed to arriving punctually before the working day begins and to not leaving before five o' clock in the afternoon. OBJECT TO Note that the opposite of agree to is object to and here only the -ing pattern is possible: What do you object to in her behaviour? I object to her going out every evening and not telling me where she is going.

MADE OF and MADE FROM

Let's start by looking at some examples - I might say: "This shirt is made of cotton" "This house is made of bricks" "The keyboard I use on my computer is made of plastic." On the other hand, we might say: "Paper is made from trees." "Wine is made from grapes." OR "This cake is made from all natural ingredients." So, if you think about the first group of examples, you'll notice that there's a common theme. The cotton in the shirt is still cotton - it hasn't changed its form and become something else. In the same way, the bricks in the walls of the house - they're still bricks. They didn't stop being bricks when the house was made. And the plastic in my computer keyboard is still plastic. On the other hand, the trees in the example where we say: "The paper is made from trees." These trees are not trees anymore - they stopped being trees when they became paper. And if we say: "Wine is made from grapes." The grapes are no longer grapes - they've been changed into a different type of stuff - a different type of substance - in this case, wine. And the flour and the eggs and the sugar in the example about the cake; these have all changed their forms as well when they became cake. So this is the rule: If something keeps its form, we use 'made of' But if the form is changed during the process of making, then we use 'made from'.

HORRIBLE and TERRIFIC

The following words are all adjectives - horrible, horrific, terrible, terrific. For example: bored and boring interested and interesting 'HORRIBLE' and 'HORRIFIC' are both related to the noun 'HORROR'... 'HORROR' means strong fear, shock, or repulsion. So, if we say that something is 'HORRIFIC', that means that it makes us feel horror. a horrific war a horrific illness 'HORRIBLE' can mean the same as 'HORRIFIC' in fact, or it has a different meaning also. It can also mean unpleasant or disgusting. a horrible traffic accident Ugh! This coffee is horrible! HORRIFIC is stronger generally - if we talk about "a horrific war", that's stronger than "a horrible war". On the other hand, it's also important to remember that 'HORRIBLE' is more often used in normal everyday spoken English. 'HORRIFIC' is a slightly more formal word. And then, 'TERRIBLE' and 'TERRIFIC'.... So you can use 'TERRIBLE' in several different ways: 'TERRIBLE' has both the meanings of 'HORRIBLE', so we can talk about: A terrible accident A terrible cup of coffee We can also use it with very general meaning, meaning just very bad. So you could say: This movie is terrible This actor is terrible On the other hand, 'TERRIFIC' is most often used to mean 'very good', so: This homework is terrific This homework is terrible 'TERRIFIC' can also mean 'very strong' or 'very intense', so we can talk about 'terrific speed' - you could say: The car is travelling at terrific speed

AFRAID

The most common meaning of 'AFRAID' is when we want to politely tell someone something that may upset, disappoint, annoy or even worry them. In terms of the grammar, we can say either: 'I'm afraid that there are at least seven ways' OR... 'I'm afraid there are at least seven ways' - without using 'that'. We usually hear this meaning of 'AFRAID' in spoken English. The next most common meaning of 'AFRAID' is 'to be frightened'. But remember that 'AFRAID' can't be used before a noun, so we can't talk about 'an easily afraid person'. That's not right. Instead, try these: 'He's an easily frightened person' or even simpler, 'He's easily frightened.' 'He's afraid of something' - for example, ?He's afraid of spiders? 'He's afraid to do something - for example, ?He's afraid to ask for help.? 'He's afraid of doing something - for example, ?He's afraid of flying.? Less common uses of the adjective 'AFRAID' are used as a way of saying either 'yes' and 'no'. 'AFRAID' + NOT... is used to mean 'no' And 'AFRAID' + SO... is used to mean 'yes'. Here's an example of how we can use 'AFRAID' to mean 'no': A: Are you doing anything nice this weekend, Femi? F: I'm afraid not, I have to work - I need the money! Or when someone calls and the person they want to speak to isn't there: A: Could I speak to Sun Chen please? B: I'm afraid not, he's not available at the moment. Would you like to leave a message? Next, 'AFRAID' meaning 'yes': A: Are you leaving now, Yvonne? Y: I'm afraid so, I have to be home by 9 o'clock. We can use the word 'AFRAID' in the following ways: First, to politely tell someone something that may disappoint them. Second, to simply mean: 'frightened'. And third, to mean 'yes' when we say 'I'm afraid so' - and 'no' when we say 'I'm afraid not'.

LARGE AND BIG

First I'll talk about form: 'LARGE' and 'BIG' are both regular adjectives... Their comparative forms are 'LARGER' and 'BIGGER'. Their superlative forms are 'LARGEST' and 'BIGGEST'. 'BIG' is a very common word in both written and spoken English; in fact, it's in the top 1,000 most frequently used words. 'LARGE', on the other hand, is a less frequently used word and doesn't even make it into the top 3,000 most frequently used words in English. Now, the meaning... The general meaning of both 'LARGE' and 'BIG' is: 'of more than average size/amount/weight/height' etc. For example: 'Iryna has got a well-paid job and can afford to live in a house' 'Iryna lives in a large house'. In these examples, both 'LARGE' and 'BIG' mean that Iryna's house is of more than average size. Although 'LARGE' and 'BIG' both mean the same in these examples, 'LARGE' sounds a little more formal. Neither 'LARGE' nor 'BIG' can be used with uncountable nouns. This means, we can say: 'The house has a (big or large) garden' - because 'garden' is countable. However, we can't use 'LARGE' or 'BIG' with 'traffic', because 'traffic' is uncountable. With uncountable nouns, you can use 'a lot of' - for example: 'There's a lot of traffic on the road next to the house.' So, although 'LARGE' and 'BIG' are often interchangeable, sometimes they are not. So next, I'll try and give you some examples of when this is the case... 'BIG' can mean 'important', for example: 'Buying a house is a very big decision'. It can also be used in informal situations to mean 'older', for example: 'He's my big brother'... as well as 'successful' or 'powerful', for example: 'York is a big tourist destination'. Also in informal situations, we can use 'BIG' to mean 'doing something to a large degree', for example: 'She earns a lot of money, but she's also a big spender' - OR... 'I'm a big fan of yours'. 'BIG' is used in a lot of fixed phrases, and because these phrases are fixed, to change 'LARGE' and 'BIG' would sound wrong. Examples of fixed phrases using 'BIG' include: 'It's no big deal' - it's not really important. 'I have big ideas for this house' - impressive plans for the future. 'She's a big mouth' - a person who can't be trusted to keep a secret. 'He's too big for his boots' - too proud of himself. There are also some fixed phrases using 'LARGE'. Examples include: 'The prisoners are at large' - they have escaped and may cause harm. 'She's larger than life' - more exciting or amusing than most people. Finally, quantity words.... 'LARGE', more often than 'big', is used with the following quantity words: 'a large amount' 'on a large scale' 'a large number of' 'a large quantity of' 'a large proportion' 'to a large extent' 'a large percentage of' 'a large part of' 'a large volume' 'a large area'

SUCH AS AND AS SUCH

AS SUCH has two meanings. The first is quite difficult to explain, so let's look at an example. I could say, Paul is an English teacher, and because he is an English teacher he hates to see grammar mistakes. Another way to say this, with the same meaning, is like this: Paul is an English teacher, and as an English teacher he hates to see grammar mistakes. However, in this sentence I'm saying the words 'an English teacher' twice. An easier way to say it is like this: Paul is an English teacher, and as such he hates to see grammar mistakes. In this example, we use the word SUCH to represent the words 'an English teacher', the second time it appears. Here are some similar examples. You could say: She's an athlete, and as such she has to train very hard. The film was a romance, and as such it had the usual happy ending. We can also use AS SUCH to mean something like 'exactly' in a sentence like this: The shop doesn't sell books as such, but it does sell magazines and newspapers. Magazines and newspapers are similar to books, but they are not exactly books. Or: He isn't American as such, but he's spent most of his life there. Spending most of your life in America is similar to being American, but it isn't exactly the same as being American. SUCH AS is much easier; it has the same meaning as 'like' or 'for example' (but not exactly the same grammar, so be careful there!). We use it in sentences like this: There are lots of things to see in London, such as the Tower of London, the London Eye and St. Paul's Cathedral. Or: Many countries in Europe, such as France and Germany, use Euros.

MUSTN'T AND DON'T HAVE TO

'MUST' and 'HAVE TO' are what we call 'modal verbs' and this category of verbs also includes 'may', 'might', 'should', 'can', 'could' and so on. There are two things to know about modal verbs: Firstly, they usually follow a particular grammatical pattern - they're followed by the infinitive, usually without 'to', so: You must go I might see him And secondly, it's not a bad idea to learn them according to their meaning or how they're used - their function, if you like. For example, they're used to show possibility or give permission. And this brings me back to 'MUST' and 'HAVE TO'. Now, one of the ways that 'MUST' is used in the positive, is when a speaker's telling you to do something and you really don't have any choice - it's an obligation. And here's an example: My daughter wants to go out and I say to her, "Well, you can go out, but you MUST be back by 8." I have the authority, I'm her mother. I could have said: "You have to be back by 8" - but that would have been a bit weak. The basic meaning would be the same - still obligation - but it would sound much less strong. Now that's because 'HAVE TO' shows obligation more generally - it doesn't necessarily come from a strong, outside authority. So that's the positive forms. But when we come to the negative forms, the difference in meaning is bigger. For example, if I say to my daughter: "You mustn't stay out after 8" that's my authority, my rule. I'm forbidding her from staying out any later; she has no choice. So 'MUST', 'MUSTN'T' - there's a kind of strong authority there. But if I say: "You don't have to stay out after 8", it's much weaker - in fact it means something a little bit different. It implies she doesn't really want to go out and she doesn't really want to come back after eight and I'm reassuring her that that's okay; she's got a choice. So, 'DON'T HAVE TO' means you don't need to, you're not obliged to, it's not necessary for you to stay out if you really don't feel like it - you have a choice.

DO AND WOULD

'DOES' and 'DOESN'T' are all present simple forms of the verb 'to do'. One of the main uses of the present simple is to express a general truth, a fact, habit or routine when we're not only thinking about now but thinking in general. He doesn't know - this suggests to me a simple fact or general truth about his situation, in the same way that if I say I don't own a cat or He doesn't like ice-cream this is simply a general fact or truth without any particular time attached to it. 'WOULD' can be used in several different ways. He wouldn't know, we're using it in this case to hypothesise or imagine how much - or conversely - how little he knows. Here we don't think it's very likely that he would know, but it's not as definite as using the present simple form 'doesn't know' where you feel absolutely sure about the limits of his knowledge. So one of the most common uses of 'WOULD' or 'WOULD'T'' is to hypothesise or imagine a situation or action. If we want to express this in the past, we have to use 'WOULD' or 'WOULD'T'' with 'have' and the past participle - in this case 'WOULD'T HAVE KNOWN' or 'WOULD'T HAVE DONE'.

CAN AND COULD

We use 'can' for something that is possible or to show that somebody has the ability to do something in the present and future. For example: We can see the park from our house Pamela can speak fluent Italian The negative here is 'can't'...as in: He can't swim very well. 'Could' is generally used as the past form of 'can'. So, Pamela could speak fluent Italian when she was young, and she can speak several other languages now too. When I was a child I could run fast We use 'could' for general past ability, but be a little bit careful here, because when we're talking about what happened in a particular situation, we tend to use 'was/were able to' for past ability instead. The fire spread quickly, but luckily everybody was able to escape We also use 'could' to talk about possible actions now and in the future - here the function is possibility (not ability) - and this is what tends to cause the confusion around these words. If we want to express past possibility, we need to use could + have and the past participle (have done, have been etc). Finally, let's look at how we commonly use can / could in question forms to make requests (or ask for things). If we go shopping for clothes, we might ask 'can / could I try that dress on please?' 'Could I see those shoes in blue.' Here, either 'can' or 'could' may be used without significant difference. The only thing worth noting is that in terms of register, that is (style and formality), 'could' is considered slightly more formal or polite.