Usenet Posted 23 years ago
Usage
Inverted verbs
The following sentences use "inverted verbs".
1)According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSE their jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions.
Is the above sentence semantically and grammatically correct?
1)According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSE their jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions.
why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?
2)Have I an associate who has extensive social web in this situation, I can just ask him to make request for me.
Is the above sentence semantically and grammatically correct?
Top answer
[nq:1]The following sentences use "inverted verbs". 1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSE their jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions. [/nq] It's a rearranged conditional statement: If a majority of telecommuters were to lose their jobs, they would look for other telecommuting positions.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0
[nq:1]The following sentences use "inverted verbs". 1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSE their jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions. why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
It's a rearranged conditional statement:
If a majority of telecommuters were to lose their jobs, they would look for other telecommuting pos
00
[nq:1]The following sentences use "inverted verbs". 1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSEtheir jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions. == why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
No verbs are inverted in Case 1.
In the subordinate clause, it is normal for English to use the formula:
1 = conditional subordinating
No verbs are inverted in Case 1.
In the subordinate clause, it is normal for English to use the formula:
1 = conditional subordinating
00
[nq:1]The following sentences use "inverted verbs". 1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSE their jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions. why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
The construction is "be to lose", as in "he is to lose his job", meaning "he will lose his job", with an inference that there is a schedule for
00
[nq:1]No. First, only past tense forms were used in this construction, so the sentence should have started with 'Had', not ... houses with additions from various periods; and this surrounded by a multitude of new boroughs." Ludwig Wittgenstein, 'Philosophische Untersuchungen'[/nq]
You have zeroed in on the gist. Yet in TOEFL, we, the non-native speakers still need to answer the archaic questio
You have zeroed in on the gist. Yet in TOEFL, we, the non-native speakers still need to answer the archaic questio
00
0
[nq:2]1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of ... why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
[nq:1]It's a rearranged conditional statement: If a majority of telecommuters were to lose their jobs, they would look for other telecommuting positions.[/nq]
In particular, in conditionals that use the auxiliary verbs "were", "had", or "should", it's possible to express
[nq:1]It's a rearranged conditional statement: If a majority of telecommuters were to lose their jobs, they would look for other telecommuting positions.[/nq]
In particular, in conditionals that use the auxiliary verbs "were", "had", or "should", it's possible to express
00
[nq:1]The following sentences use "inverted verbs". 1) According to a recent survey, WERE a majority of telecommuters TO LOSEtheir jobs, they WOULD look for other telecommuting positions. why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
why WERE followed by an infinitive TO LOSE are used?[/nq]
The word "would" is followed by an infinitive also, namely, "look," so the question should be "In the sentence in question, why is the infinitive
00
[nq:1]... } it's pompous and serves no purpose. Oy![/nq]
I bet you were hoping that no one would see your "Oy!" I saw it right away, but let you stew for a while ...
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
I bet you were hoping that no one would see your "Oy!" I saw it right away, but let you stew for a while ...
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
00
...
}
}>} it's pompous and serves no purpose. }>
}> Oy!
}
} I bet you were hoping that no one would see your "Oy!" I saw it right away, } but let you stew for a while ...
I just flag 'em as I spot 'em. If you want to discuss them, I'm willing; but I've got more pressing matters than stewing about whether anyone else catches them.
Could be he was just kidding ar
}
}>} it's pompous and serves no purpose. }>
}> Oy!
}
} I bet you were hoping that no one would see your "Oy!" I saw it right away, } but let you stew for a while ...
I just flag 'em as I spot 'em. If you want to discuss them, I'm willing; but I've got more pressing matters than stewing about whether anyone else catches them.
Could be he was just kidding ar
00
[nq:1]... }>} it's pompous and serves no purpose. }> }> Oy! } } I bet you were hoping that no ... about whether anyone else catches them. Could be he was just kidding around, but I can't say I've noticed precedent.[/nq]
Kidding around about what? Exactly what were you Oying? You didn't quote the whole sentence, so it must not be the expressed thought. All the words are spelled correct
Kidding around about what? Exactly what were you Oying? You didn't quote the whole sentence, so it must not be the expressed thought. All the words are spelled correct
0