What’s the difference between either for or in ‘as are in the following examples?

• Bill hasn’t taken a vacation in years. Apparently his husband is addicted to drugs.
• In his younger years Jack will not continue to go to school.
• I hadn’t seen Mary for 3 weeks, until she finally decided to show up. She finally showed up.

There is no difference in grammatical quality. All 3 sentences are grammatical, with either for or in.

There is no difference in meaning. In all the sentences described by Ellie, for, or in, the situation occurred with or for.

What is the difference between syntactic affordances and predicates? If with an indefinite durative temporal phrase ( in weeks, in two days, in donkey’s years, in a long time, etc. ), is a Negative Polarity Item. In two days is restricted to negative contexts, while for two days has no such restriction.

What types of examples are above negative. I’m struggling with removing the null argument fromn’t. Why does this matter?

Is there any way to illustrate the sentences in For works fine.?

• Bill has been on vacation for 2 years. (a very long vacation)
• Jack has been to school for eight days. (By the way, he was able to swim, he hasn’t slept for a week) I had seen Mary for
• three weeks and had she never left, but she was an innkeeper. After. I stayed behind because of her physical defect. (indicates frequent or continuous contact)

But all the ones with i are ungrammatical, and have no discernible meaning, and are thus “worrying”.
* Jack has been to school for

• three days now. Is he in normal English?
• Bill hasn’t taken any vacations in over a year, but took a vacation in 6 months. Is he in better shape then I felt he would be?
• I had not seen Mary in three weeks.

In the negative, there’s two ways to refer to duration, with in and for.
In a negative context, no, the system doesn’t work the same way. Negation is complex.

What’s the difference between either for or in ‘as are in the following examples?

• Bill hasn’t taken a vacation in years. Apparently his husband is addicted to drugs.
• In his younger years Jack will not continue to go to school.
• I hadn’t seen Mary for 3 weeks, until she finally decided to show up. She finally showed up.

There is no difference in grammatical quality. All 3 sentences are grammatical, with either for or in.

There is no difference in meaning. In all the sentences described by Ellie, for, or in, the situation occurred with or for.

What is the difference between syntactic affordances and predicates? If with an indefinite durative temporal phrase ( in weeks, in two days, in donkey’s years, in a long time, etc. ), is a Negative Polarity Item. In two days is restricted to negative contexts, while for two days has no such restriction.

What types of examples are above negative. I’m struggling with removing the null argument fromn’t. Why does this matter?

Is there any way to illustrate the sentences in For works fine.?

• Bill has been on vacation for 2 years. (a very long vacation)
• Jack has been to school for eight days. (By the way, he was able to swim, he hasn’t slept for a week) I had seen Mary for
• three weeks and had she never left, but she was an innkeeper. After. I stayed behind because of her physical defect. (indicates frequent or continuous contact)

But all the ones with i are ungrammatical, and have no discernible meaning, and are thus “worrying”.
* Jack has been to school for

• three days now. Is he in normal English?
• Bill hasn’t taken any vacations in over a year, but took a vacation in 6 months. Is he in better shape then I felt he would be?
• I had not seen Mary in three weeks.

In the negative, there’s two ways to refer to duration, with in and for.
In a negative context, no, the system doesn’t work the same way. Negation is complex.

What’s the difference between either for or in ‘as are in the following examples?

• Bill hasn’t taken a vacation in years. Apparently his husband is addicted to drugs.
• In his younger years Jack will not continue to go to school.
• I hadn’t seen Mary for 3 weeks, until she finally decided to show up. She finally showed up.

There is no difference in grammatical quality. All 3 sentences are grammatical, with either for or in.

There is no difference in meaning. In all the sentences described by Ellie, for, or in, the situation occurred with or for.

What is the difference between syntactic affordances and predicates? If with an indefinite durative temporal phrase ( in weeks, in two days, in donkey’s years, in a long time, etc. ), is a Negative Polarity Item. In two days is restricted to negative contexts, while for two days has no such restriction.

What types of examples are above negative. I’m struggling with removing the null argument fromn’t. Why does this matter?

Is there any way to illustrate the sentences in For works fine.?

• Bill has been on vacation for 2 years. (a very long vacation)
• Jack has been to school for eight days. (By the way, he was able to swim, he hasn’t slept for a week) I had seen Mary for
• three weeks and had she never left, but she was an innkeeper. After. I stayed behind because of her physical defect. (indicates frequent or continuous contact)

But all the ones with i are ungrammatical, and have no discernible meaning, and are thus “worrying”.
* Jack has been to school for

• three days now. Is he in normal English?
• Bill hasn’t taken any vacations in over a year, but took a vacation in 6 months. Is he in better shape then I felt he would be?
• I had not seen Mary in three weeks.

In the negative, there’s two ways to refer to duration, with in and for.
In a negative context, no, the system doesn’t work the same way. Negation is complex.

What are the qualities of a good solution-seeker?
However, so is the ability to… Note

the auxiliary verb is in the second clause; it should normally follow the subject noun phrase the ability to… The two sentences together form a So -Tag, where so means also and refers to the predicate of the preceding clause, as Jens has pointed out.

• Billy went to the ball game and so did Mary. (with Do -Support)
• Frank is tired, but so is Mary.
• These are excellent, but so is that.

How do I become a better person in the future?

What are the qualities of a good solution-seeker?
However, so is the ability to… Note

the auxiliary verb is in the second clause; it should normally follow the subject noun phrase the ability to… The two sentences together form a So -Tag, where so means also and refers to the predicate of the preceding clause, as Jens has pointed out.

• Billy went to the ball game and so did Mary. (with Do -Support)
• Frank is tired, but so is Mary.
• These are excellent, but so is that.

How do I become a better person in the future?

What are the qualities of a good solution-seeker?
However, so is the ability to… Note

the auxiliary verb is in the second clause; it should normally follow the subject noun phrase the ability to… The two sentences together form a So -Tag, where so means also and refers to the predicate of the preceding clause, as Jens has pointed out.

• Billy went to the ball game and so did Mary. (with Do -Support)
• Frank is tired, but so is Mary.
• These are excellent, but so is that.

How do I become a better person in the future?

With so many ways to start a car, there are some good ways to talk about it. Except for (1) and (2), these are fine.

While there is a Rule of English grammar being violated in (1) and (2), there is no English grammar rule being violated in each of these sentences.
Native speakers know it, because they follow it, but they never state it to any native speakers.
Non-native speakers don’t need to be taught this rule, however it’s not obvious.

• If a noun is an attribute of more than one word, a noun is the only item to which it adds the noun modifier.
  When noun modifiers contain only one word, it goes before the character it modifies.
  Mnemonic : an eleven year old boy versus a boy eleven years

old Since turned off/on is more than one word, it must follow car. not precede it.
A car turned off or on is Okay, but not * A turned off car.

Is there a single word, metaphoric term turned on/off, which refers to affectual

• display, He describes himself as turned-on, and had to answer his questions but he didn’t answer his questions.

Besides the metaphor, it doesn’t refer to actual machine power status.) This

rule is the one that makes the famous cat video Maru and the Too

• Small Box so odd-sounding to native

English speakers.

With so many ways to start a car, there are some good ways to talk about it. Except for (1) and (2), these are fine.

While there is a Rule of English grammar being violated in (1) and (2), there is no English grammar rule being violated in each of these sentences.
Native speakers know it, because they follow it, but they never state it to any native speakers.
Non-native speakers don’t need to be taught this rule, however it’s not obvious.

• If a noun is an attribute of more than one word, a noun is the only item to which it adds the noun modifier.
  When noun modifiers contain only one word, it goes before the character it modifies.
  Mnemonic : an eleven year old boy versus a boy eleven years

old Since turned off/on is more than one word, it must follow car. not precede it.
A car turned off or on is Okay, but not * A turned off car.

Is there a single word, metaphoric term turned on/off, which refers to affectual

• display, He describes himself as turned-on, and had to answer his questions but he didn’t answer his questions.

Besides the metaphor, it doesn’t refer to actual machine power status.) This

rule is the one that makes the famous cat video Maru and the Too

• Small Box so odd-sounding to native

English speakers.

With so many ways to start a car, there are some good ways to talk about it. Except for (1) and (2), these are fine.

While there is a Rule of English grammar being violated in (1) and (2), there is no English grammar rule being violated in each of these sentences.
Native speakers know it, because they follow it, but they never state it to any native speakers.
Non-native speakers don’t need to be taught this rule, however it’s not obvious.

• If a noun is an attribute of more than one word, a noun is the only item to which it adds the noun modifier.
  When noun modifiers contain only one word, it goes before the character it modifies.
  Mnemonic : an eleven year old boy versus a boy eleven years

old Since turned off/on is more than one word, it must follow car. not precede it.
A car turned off or on is Okay, but not * A turned off car.

Is there a single word, metaphoric term turned on/off, which refers to affectual

• display, He describes himself as turned-on, and had to answer his questions but he didn’t answer his questions.

Besides the metaphor, it doesn’t refer to actual machine power status.) This

rule is the one that makes the famous cat video Maru and the Too

• Small Box so odd-sounding to native

English speakers.

With so many ways to start a car, there are some good ways to talk about it. Except for (1) and (2), these are fine.

While there is a Rule of English grammar being violated in (1) and (2), there is no English grammar rule being violated in each of these sentences.
Native speakers know it, because they follow it, but they never state it to any native speakers.
Non-native speakers don’t need to be taught this rule, however it’s not obvious.

• If a noun is an attribute of more than one word, a noun is the only item to which it adds the noun modifier.
  When noun modifiers contain only one word, it goes before the character it modifies.
  Mnemonic : an eleven year old boy versus a boy eleven years

old Since turned off/on is more than one word, it must follow car. not precede it.
A car turned off or on is Okay, but not * A turned off car.

Is there a single word, metaphoric term turned on/off, which refers to affectual

• display, He describes himself as turned-on, and had to answer his questions but he didn’t answer his questions.

Besides the metaphor, it doesn’t refer to actual machine power status.) This

rule is the one that makes the famous cat video Maru and the Too

• Small Box so odd-sounding to native

English speakers.