Is there no one I can meet or like yet.

How could we construct sentences with a similar meaning to the one above using a “yet-to” type construction.

• I have yet to meet him.

Where the word “wast” follows the auxiliary verb in this sentence, the word is not really followed by an to infinitive clause. The biggest difference between this construction and the original phrase is that this original uses a negative clause, whereas the yet-to construction uses a positive one. How would that phrase work if I hadn’t met Him yet and could never meet him in future?

Is Michael Owen the best player so far

• in the competition?

What should I expect. I’m yet to see a better player than

• Michael Owen and I want him to get an equivalent meaning without paying for me to find them I can write.

What can happen in this sentence? Why is Micheal Owen right? In the original example, this is ruled out because Michael is the best. Why it is a negativity instead of an adjective I guess a new sentence is in that I haven’t seen someone as good as Michael Owen. I’ve watched a bunch of him. Notice that adjective phrases modified by as are before the whole noun phrase and not directly before the

• noun: as good a meal.
• *an as good meal. Is

Michael Owen ever the

• most good player in this competition?

Alternatively, we could use the adverb such instead of the adverb as. Notice that such modifies whole noun phrases! Is there a good

• player in the tournament?
• If you use such the

sentence will be like this.. I’ve yet to see such

• a good player as Michael Owen in this competition.

What are the best reasons to get married?

1. What is the evidence for the validity of the sentences that

2. were entered into the database and the results compared?

Is the passive auxiliary by any method. Any one can do this. The ellipsis of auxiliaries in coordinated sentences is quite a common and natural. Also, we quite often see auxiliaries and lexical verbs elided. However, the problem here is that the sentence can garden path your reader. What this means is that the reader may start interpreting the second clause in a different way from intended, and then, when they get to the end of the sentence, may have to go back and re-parse what they’ve read.

In particular the ellipsis of the passive auxiliary in this particular example means that the subject occurs next to what looks like a tensed (past simple) verb form. In fact it is a past participle but the reader won’t know this until they get to the end of the sentence (and maybe backtrack and reread). Next to the second

• clause,… The results compared

Perhaps this may make the whole idea sound logical as if the results were doing the comparing – as opposed to somebody was comparing the results. This is not a fatal problem once we get to the end of the sentence, the editor involved may feel that it is a problem best avoided for the sake of ease of reading.

Negative questions, in other words ones where the inverted auxiliary is negated tend to create an implicature that the speaker already has an opinion about the probable answer. Why are people ‘biased’? Why is the following question important? Let’s say the speaker suspects (or has suspected until very recently) that Mary gave the book to the listener yesterday: Didn’t Mary give

• you the book yesterday?

In the Original Poster’s example, the negation of auxiliary is is used to convey that the speaker suspects (or suspected until just now) that the proposition in the remainder of the clause is the case. It so happened in this example that the proposition that the speaker suspects is true is a negative one.

• There’s no need.

If a question is a simple yes or no then what does that mean?

• Did she give it to you?

What are the metric differences between the answers of the first and second questions? Is it true that after double negation a question is automatically cleared? In normal declarative sentences, negation changes the actual meaning of the sentence. She

• gave me the book. I’ve heard it many times, but this sucked.
• She didn’t give me the book.

If we add further negation, the truth conditional meaning of the sentence will be similar to the Non-negated sentence.

No real negation in questions to be cancelled by subsequent negation. As we have seen, as we have seen there is no real negation in questions to be cancelled out by further negation. A doubly negated question and a declarative sentence have something in common. All of the negative propositions mentioned by they both indicate that there is some previous negative proposition which has been entertained. In the original Poster’s example, it is the proposition that there is no need. In the book example above it is the idea that she didn’t give me the book (?

In answer to the original poster’s question then, the two negations in its answer don’t cancel each other out in any way. Arguably the different negations have different functions. One is there to indicate some previously supposed idea, the other is to show that the idea is negative.

There is no other way to do this apart from using double negation. Do you believe the non-truth conditional meaning of a sentence is as communicatively important as the truth conditional meaning of a sentence? This is the case with the original poster’s image. Which are the original ads? The communication of the presupposition on the part of the speaker that there is no need is part of the suasive force of the question.

Negative questions, in other words ones where the inverted auxiliary is negated tend to create an implicature that the speaker already has an opinion about the probable answer. Why are people ‘biased’? Why is the following question important? Let’s say the speaker suspects (or has suspected until very recently) that Mary gave the book to the listener yesterday: Didn’t Mary give

• you the book yesterday?

In the Original Poster’s example, the negation of auxiliary is is used to convey that the speaker suspects (or suspected until just now) that the proposition in the remainder of the clause is the case. It so happened in this example that the proposition that the speaker suspects is true is a negative one.

• There’s no need.

If a question is a simple yes or no then what does that mean?

• Did she give it to you?

What are the metric differences between the answers of the first and second questions? Is it true that after double negation a question is automatically cleared? In normal declarative sentences, negation changes the actual meaning of the sentence. She

• gave me the book. I’ve heard it many times, but this sucked.
• She didn’t give me the book.

If we add further negation, the truth conditional meaning of the sentence will be similar to the Non-negated sentence.

No real negation in questions to be cancelled by subsequent negation. As we have seen, as we have seen there is no real negation in questions to be cancelled out by further negation. A doubly negated question and a declarative sentence have something in common. All of the negative propositions mentioned by they both indicate that there is some previous negative proposition which has been entertained. In the original Poster’s example, it is the proposition that there is no need. In the book example above it is the idea that she didn’t give me the book (?

In answer to the original poster’s question then, the two negations in its answer don’t cancel each other out in any way. Arguably the different negations have different functions. One is there to indicate some previously supposed idea, the other is to show that the idea is negative.

There is no other way to do this apart from using double negation. Do you believe the non-truth conditional meaning of a sentence is as communicatively important as the truth conditional meaning of a sentence? This is the case with the original poster’s image. Which are the original ads? The communication of the presupposition on the part of the speaker that there is no need is part of the suasive force of the question.

Negative questions, in other words ones where the inverted auxiliary is negated tend to create an implicature that the speaker already has an opinion about the probable answer. Why are people ‘biased’? Why is the following question important? Let’s say the speaker suspects (or has suspected until very recently) that Mary gave the book to the listener yesterday: Didn’t Mary give

• you the book yesterday?

In the Original Poster’s example, the negation of auxiliary is is used to convey that the speaker suspects (or suspected until just now) that the proposition in the remainder of the clause is the case. It so happened in this example that the proposition that the speaker suspects is true is a negative one.

• There’s no need.

If a question is a simple yes or no then what does that mean?

• Did she give it to you?

What are the metric differences between the answers of the first and second questions? Is it true that after double negation a question is automatically cleared? In normal declarative sentences, negation changes the actual meaning of the sentence. She

• gave me the book. I’ve heard it many times, but this sucked.
• She didn’t give me the book.

If we add further negation, the truth conditional meaning of the sentence will be similar to the Non-negated sentence.

No real negation in questions to be cancelled by subsequent negation. As we have seen, as we have seen there is no real negation in questions to be cancelled out by further negation. A doubly negated question and a declarative sentence have something in common. All of the negative propositions mentioned by they both indicate that there is some previous negative proposition which has been entertained. In the original Poster’s example, it is the proposition that there is no need. In the book example above it is the idea that she didn’t give me the book (?

In answer to the original poster’s question then, the two negations in its answer don’t cancel each other out in any way. Arguably the different negations have different functions. One is there to indicate some previously supposed idea, the other is to show that the idea is negative.

There is no other way to do this apart from using double negation. Do you believe the non-truth conditional meaning of a sentence is as communicatively important as the truth conditional meaning of a sentence? This is the case with the original poster’s image. Which are the original ads? The communication of the presupposition on the part of the speaker that there is no need is part of the suasive force of the question.

Is this ambiguous in writing but completely unambiguous in speech? In the example sentence that is a noun phrase, not a subordinator. Which word has been changed to this? The word “talks about” was mentioned in the previous sentence. We saw this when Chinese warships turned up off the coast of

• Alaska within U.S. territorial waters at the same time that President Obama was on the ground here].

This sentence is a transcript of a spoken report by a journalist for CNN. When we read the sentence it is easy to think that the word that is a subordinate. Compare the following sentences:

• I saw that yesterday.
• I saw that she had already left me.

In the first sentence that means the thing. In the second sentence the word introduces another clause. Notice that in the second sentence the verb “See” changes its meaning; it means something like NOTICE or UNDERSTAND.

In the original poster’s example, the word that means that thing, it won’t introduce a new clause. Now, when we read the sentence, the word that is ambiguous until we get to the end of the sentence and then realise that it cannot be the subordinator. However, this sentence is from spoken report. When you speak out a sentence in English, this sentence will not be ambiguous.

What does the word “Cat” mean? What does the IPA look like; /t /? This is the subordinator that is almost never stressed and is almost always pronounced / T/ with the same vowel as we find at the beginning of the word America. Why we just don’t confuse both of these very

often in a conversation.

“In American English, most varieties are rhotic, but not all are rhotic.” “To pronounce orthographic words \”R\”-based, one has to remember ‘R\” regardless of sound around it.” “In non-rhotic varieties of English – such as Southern Standard British English – orthographic ‘r’ is only pronounced if followed by a vowel.” “In the sentences above the ‘r”s in car and car park aren’t pronounced, they’re not followed by a vowel.” “In contrast the first ‘r’ in car alarm is pronounces because it is followed by the vowel at the beginning of alarm.” “\”R\”s in carrots are also pronounced the same in both cases.” “The Original Poster is definitely learning about a non-rhotic variety of English, maybe RP, however, the American speaker in the clip they are listening to speaks a rhotic variety.” “Has ‘r’ been in silent since it is followed by /d/.” “In rhotic English, all rhotic bits must be pronounced.”

Is this ambiguous in writing but completely unambiguous in speech? In the example sentence that is a noun phrase, not a subordinator. Which word has been changed to this? The word “talks about” was mentioned in the previous sentence. We saw this when Chinese warships turned up off the coast of

• Alaska within U.S. territorial waters at the same time that President Obama was on the ground here].

This sentence is a transcript of a spoken report by a journalist for CNN. When we read the sentence it is easy to think that the word that is a subordinate. Compare the following sentences:

• I saw that yesterday.
• I saw that she had already left me.

In the first sentence that means the thing. In the second sentence the word introduces another clause. Notice that in the second sentence the verb “See” changes its meaning; it means something like NOTICE or UNDERSTAND.

In the original poster’s example, the word that means that thing, it won’t introduce a new clause. Now, when we read the sentence, the word that is ambiguous until we get to the end of the sentence and then realise that it cannot be the subordinator. However, this sentence is from spoken report. When you speak out a sentence in English, this sentence will not be ambiguous.

What does the word “Cat” mean? What does the IPA look like; /t /? This is the subordinator that is almost never stressed and is almost always pronounced / T/ with the same vowel as we find at the beginning of the word America. Why we just don’t confuse both of these very

often in a conversation.

What is the use of “reporting” speech by a speaker instead of using words that “helped you” to tell your story? When you give somebody else – a new listener – that data, it must make sense to the listener now. As you give about a piece of information, you give more information.

Introducing the original poster. Take a humorous example of how this is done. Lets us give a date that the original information was provided

We can deliver next week. What happened before President of Spain,

Vladimir Putin proposed giving the official report on the date of First Declared Feb. thday of the month as well as being hopeful of having a decision after they put that decision to rest.

What is the official date of 1st February? I want to tell my friend about your company. The company is getting the best package? We are planning postponing delivery to 15 days from now. The expected delivery should be done by mid next week. When you give the information to a friend you will still say next week, as in the example above.

Now suppose it is Monday 7th February and you want to tell a friend what the company said and they have no problem and you say it is a company letter. What is the information that the company gave you was that the potential delivery time was in the week 7th-13th February. Today is 7th of February. All our celebrations are free. When you give information to your friend, you will have to say this week, because this is the week of the potential delivery: He said

they could deliver this week.

Imagine we are on July, months later. What should I do if I tell my friend about the information you were given when I tried to buy a sofa in February (even though you didn’t buy the sofa)? You must tell your friend that the information must be true in order to make sense in the future. Is the planned delivery date for this CD to be published on 14th February 2014? You spoke to the company on 1st February. What is it like now? Why is it that we don’t care for our destination date? How does a listener know where you are and why by saying the next week. What just means 1 week after the day you are thinking about. When I think the time I am thinking about, is the time of

conversation happened. He said they could deliver it the following week.

What’s fine, because it still makes sense in your listener now.

Sid, if the information you were given makes sense to your listener now, your sentence will always be grammatical. They use words that they have written before the first speaker. Also remember, that the first speaker used only one word. That’s why, in some way, the speaker went at the first persons words. How can we apply it in English to a different language?

What is the solution?

What are the advantages of living in the USA?

What is the use of “reporting” speech by a speaker instead of using words that “helped you” to tell your story? When you give somebody else – a new listener – that data, it must make sense to the listener now. As you give about a piece of information, you give more information.

Introducing the original poster. Take a humorous example of how this is done. Lets us give a date that the original information was provided

We can deliver next week. What happened before President of Spain,

Vladimir Putin proposed giving the official report on the date of First Declared Feb. thday of the month as well as being hopeful of having a decision after they put that decision to rest.

What is the official date of 1st February? I want to tell my friend about your company. The company is getting the best package? We are planning postponing delivery to 15 days from now. The expected delivery should be done by mid next week. When you give the information to a friend you will still say next week, as in the example above.

Now suppose it is Monday 7th February and you want to tell a friend what the company said and they have no problem and you say it is a company letter. What is the information that the company gave you was that the potential delivery time was in the week 7th-13th February. Today is 7th of February. All our celebrations are free. When you give information to your friend, you will have to say this week, because this is the week of the potential delivery: He said

they could deliver this week.

Imagine we are on July, months later. What should I do if I tell my friend about the information you were given when I tried to buy a sofa in February (even though you didn’t buy the sofa)? You must tell your friend that the information must be true in order to make sense in the future. Is the planned delivery date for this CD to be published on 14th February 2014? You spoke to the company on 1st February. What is it like now? Why is it that we don’t care for our destination date? How does a listener know where you are and why by saying the next week. What just means 1 week after the day you are thinking about. When I think the time I am thinking about, is the time of

conversation happened. He said they could deliver it the following week.

What’s fine, because it still makes sense in your listener now.

Sid, if the information you were given makes sense to your listener now, your sentence will always be grammatical. They use words that they have written before the first speaker. Also remember, that the first speaker used only one word. That’s why, in some way, the speaker went at the first persons words. How can we apply it in English to a different language?

What is the solution?

What are the advantages of living in the USA?