How can that service “incur” cost some of the same as the fees someone who paid?
What do you think of
a heating device that incurs fees for its removal?
What if the owner of a heater had to pay for the heater’s electricity use? I suspect
it is not ok, but I can’t explain why. Why did ok grammar change in this category?
For a further example, suppose you buy a place with add-on parking, is it ok to say:
The parking space will incur a $250 monthly fee.
What would be your views on the POTUS?
The sentence feels wrong as incur is a term that requires an agent who can work – incur the fee. As it is currently stated the transitive verb “incur” is being applied to an object that is incapable of agency.
Translating a word that implies or states the presence of an agent ie. I understand an agent in a similar way, in a similar manner, also with the same character in different languages. If you used “Usage” to each statement would make them logically correct because it is then clear that the user incurs the fee and the date is a line of logic. – ie. – on the application site by ie ie. “Usage of the heater will incur a monthly fee” or “Users will incur a monthly fee”.
Incur basically means to get something unpleasant, such as a bill. These sentences are grammatically correct but logically wrong. It’s not the heater/parking space that’s obligated to pay the fee, it’s the tenant. What do you think about these statements?
http://www.macmillandictionary.com. For more information, see: http://www.macmillandictionary.com. Is
it possible to say: “com/sw/dictionary/american/incurrency/com/com/us/dictionary/american/incurrency”?
