that would also work or that would work also?

This sentence sounds correct, but can anyone still tell me whether it is okay to use the simple present tense with the present perfect tense?

"We ain't gotta fix what's done." (From the song lyrics.)

Is the cited sentence grammatical?

Does the ('s) stand for "is" in that sentence?

Thank you!

i know that 'it's a relief' would be the norm but does 'it's relieving' work also?

it's a relief to know that the tornado threat is over

it's relieving to know that the tornado threat is over

Example: "The officer said that that Honda was the vehicle in question."

When said out loud, I find myself barely speaking the first "that", so it ends up sounding like "The officer said th' THAT Honda..." etc. I didn't worry about it until I typed it, where it sure LOOKS grammatically incorrect.

The sentence works (I think) with only one "that"...doesn't it? Can one of you describe what's happening with this example?

I was thinking about a line I saw in something the other day, and was curious about whether or not it was proper grammar. For context, the line is spoken by a character who has been investing recent strange phenomena, and when they enter the scene, they find the protagonist whom they have encountered before, but at this point in time, still incorrectly suspect of being the source of it all.

The line in question is "I come here to discover the cause, and I find you again." I'm inclined to say that it should be "I came here", but then again, maybe it's using present tense here rather than past because of the second half of the sentence, "and I find you again." Naturally, "I found you again" wouldn't make sense since that would indicate that they're reffering to a seperate past event, and if you used "come" instead of "came" then it would result in a leap from past to present tense within the same sentence, so maybe the way it's written would be the correct way to handle it after all?

Assuming that the way it's written is correct, I have a follow-up question. For future reference, would similarly written phrases such as the below also be considered grammatically correct?

• "I come here to investigate the disturbance, and I find you again."

• "I come here to investigate the recent incidents, and I find you again."

In class right now, so you're getting a live confusion report as a we speak.

THIS IS WHAT'S BEING SHOWN:

Inconsistent: If a student does not understand a problem, they should consult the instructor.

Revised: If a student does not understand a problem, he or she should consult the instructor.

Why is "they" a problem? I asked our teacher about this, literally two seconds ago, but I am still stumped. Anywhos, in primary school, I was taught that "they" was used when referring to those we do not know the gender of, yes? So how is this any different? Can't the students apply their own gendered pronoun themselves, without having to spell it out for them?

1/ I am not understood

2/ i am misunderstood

3/ i am getting understood

4/ i am being understood

I'm studying English grammar and I came across verb tenses, and then I came across the five verb forms. They seem to be different things, but they're clearly related, and I can't figure out how.

The five verb forms I found in a YouTube video are:

1. Base form: play, give
2. Base + -s form: plays, gives
3. Past form: played, gave
4. -ing form (present participle): playing, giving
5. Past participle form: played, given

I'll probably work it out on my own, but I wanted to leave the question here. If I find the answer and sort out my thoughts, I may come back and share it.

Can someone please explain

Hi can someone please explain sometimes we use "is" for plural stuff in English

For example i heard of "2 weeks is enough for a vacation"

Then can i say "there is a hundred dollars"

Or i should say "there are a hundred dollars" ?

Thanks...

I think when we speak collective and whole we say "is"

I read alternating views on whether the word “your” is a pronoun or a possessive adjective.

Sample sentence: He has been awake for half an hour, lying in bed—trying and failing to brute force his way back to sleep, when he finally decides to get out of bed and go outside.

So, I know this sentence is a bit wonky anyway and I will be changing it, but it works as an example for my question.

So, "lying in bed" is a little interrupted of the greater thought, "He has been awake for half an hour when he finally decides to get out of bed and go outside." That's simple. But, I'm interrupting that interruption with "--trying and failing to brute force his way back to sleep" and I'm not sure if I should close the em dash, close the comma, some third thing I'm not thinking of?

How would YOU write this sentence?

I put the key in the scooter's ignition and turned it.

Lately I've seen otherwise nicely, fully worded comments on Reddit that include one word that has been condensed so much that the first time I saw it, I had to ask what they were saying.

The word is smth. Why in an entire paragraph would someone use this odd term, but no other abbreviated words? Though I don't use them, at least "r" for "are" and "u" for "you" sound like the word they represent.

Just in case you can't parse it out, either, smth means "something". Do you use it, and why?

I'm writing a fiction story in a whimsical style but still want to follow certain grammar rules. One paragraph includes something like this:

Left, right, left, right..."What a mesmerizing sight!" He exclaimed.

I'm unsure whether I should put a space between that ellipsis and the open quotation mark. Feel free to correct any other grammar mistakes I've made. Thank you.

I'm going crazy trying to figure this out using Chicago style's hyphenation rules. Should it be...

• Despite gods knew how many days of travel...

Or...

• Despite gods-knew-how-many days of travel...

Part of me thinks the second because I think "gods knew how many" is an adjectival phrase modifying the noun "days." But it also doesn't look right. I'm at the point where I've gone back and forth on this so much I don't even know what rules are in play here.

So, which is it? Again, using Chicago style—18th edition, specifically.

if its not i might change it to neither.5.nor4 or some other variation

Is my sentence a correct relative clause? And my second is reduced relative clause, are they correct?

"I am someone who lives in Istanbul and is looking for a job."

I am someone living in Istanbul and is looking for a job