It’s crowds’ all right, not crowd’s?

It is idiomatic to say the crowds (not the crowd) in the given context. cf. “Kelton and the crowds. King of the

crowds.”

The Hobbit: Season 4 (2016-present) Crowds of fans cram the streets during the opening of the film in Courtenay Place in Wellington on November 28, 2012. (AFP Image) (Mitty Melville/AFP) (July

2011)

1. The teacher was right. We were all being told that the teachers are stupid. In the example, the initial gerund creates a poor sentence structure that needs improvement by rephrasing. Do not use initial gerund in such sentences. How should I improve my writing skills in English?

2. The teacher was wrong in not explaining that this is not about grammar, certainly not a rule.

**See our sister site ** **

** ** **. **(sel) ** ** ** **.** (se) ** ** ** **

It is continuation of usage from legacy (print) advertising. An impression is a single publication of an advertisement, derived from The platen made an impression on paper in the letter press system.

Why do I not have an impression on the viewer/user/potential customers?

Re: If the rule is “no” then it may be necessary to make change.

What is omission in this case? What is the wrong structure?

According to scripture, he shows just as little mercy to his followers as his enemies. ”

With an assumed preposition omission to for parallelism,… shows

just as little mercy to his followers as to his enemies.

However, what if it were:…

he shows just as little mercy to his followers than do his enemies.

Why should I pick a different shoe brand and avoid switching to a different one? One is grammatical, makes sense, but means something altogether different, though grammatical.

In the last five years, nobody has raised an objection about interpretation/ grammatical critique of literary works is off topic. In the past two years, I

have read so many of the articles, that it is annoying to answer your question now.