If you enjoyed this lesson could you do me a favour and HIT that like button on the video! Helps me a lot ❤ subscribe too so you don't miss the next lesson coming out! Thanks guys! 🙏🏻
Thank you! Very helpful! This is my answer: For all you food-lovers who sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, which begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisted of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
Well done! Just 2 small mistakes. For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
@oxfordenglishnow, can you please elaborate on it? Why did you use " created and produced" instead of "having being created" as per your passive perfect explanation? Though it is not suitable but i need clarification. Thank you
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon , there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen begining at 3:30 this afternoon . Among the dishes being featured as Spicy Prawns , consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today . I will be thankful if you correct my mistakes Thank you for the video of course 👌
I thoroughly enjoyed it. There was just one aspect that was slightly bothersome throughout the film, and that was the echo in the empty room. I think it would have been better to use soundproofing materials to reduce the reverb of your voices. However, overall it was excellent, and thank you.
Hi mam, the following is my question.. The ashes being immersed into the river.. Or The ashes immersed into the river.. Mam What is the difference between being + past participle vs only past participle In a reduced adjective clause...
Both "in which" and "where" can be used in relative clauses, but they are used in slightly different contexts. "In which": This is often used when referring to a place or a specific location. It is more formal and is commonly used with objects or places. Example: "I visited the museum, in which I saw many ancient artifacts." "Where": "Where" is a more versatile relative pronoun and is used to refer to both places and situations. It's more commonly used in everyday language and can replace "in which" in many contexts. Example: "I visited the museum where I saw many ancient artifacts." In summary, while both "in which" and "where" can introduce relative clauses, "in which" is often used in more formal contexts and is specific to places or objects. "Where" is a more general-purpose relative pronoun that can refer to both places and situations, and it is used in more informal language.
Great video. I would also add the construction “be about to” to the list. For example, the girl about to puke like is my sister Mabel (from Gravity Falls 😂)
Teacher i need to ask something to you. If the sentence is future passive form can we reduct this sentence with to be v3? For example: The book which will be relased tomorrow is mine The book to be relased tomorrow is mine Is this correct?
Yes, your transformation is almost correct, but there's a slight error in the wording. The correct transformation of "The book which will be released tomorrow is mine" to a reduced form would be: "The book to be released tomorrow is mine." You have the correct structure, but "relased" should be "released". Other than that, your transformation is accurate.
Yes, your transformation is almost correct, but there's a slight error in the wording. The correct transformation of "The book which will be released tomorrow is mine" to a reduced form would be: "The book to be released tomorrow is mine." You have the correct structure, but "relased" should be "released". Other than that, your transformation is accurate. z
There is one thing I couldn't understand regarding the topic: "There are no items used." "There are no used items." For the sentences above, what is the difference between them? By the way, I have liked and subscribed to your youtube channel.
Thanks for liking and subscribing to my channel! The difference between the two sentences lies in the emphasis placed on the state of the items. Let's break it down: "There are no items used.": In this sentence, the emphasis is on the action of using the items. It suggests that there are items, but none of them have been used. The focus is on the absence of the action of using. "There are no used items.": Here, the emphasis is on the state of the items themselves. It implies that there may be items present, but none of them are in a used condition. The focus is on the absence of items that have already been used. In summary, the first sentence emphasizes the lack of action (using), while the second emphasizes the lack of a specific condition (being used). I hope that helps!
@@oxfordenglishnow Thank you very much. You couldn't have explained it better. There is only one question left that I would like you to answer: We can use past and present participles as adjectives, for example: broken legs, shining stars. The thing that I can't understand is what the thing that indicates which one of the participles I can use is. In other words, can we use "shined stars" and "breaking windows"? If so, how can I understand which one is more convenient to use than the other? I want to say thank you again for your feedback.
can I try? For alll you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabuluos new show called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by Tom Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today by the way, is there any regulations on using 'which' or 'that' in relative clause?
Excuse me! Teacher. I am worried about the man who has been held in prison without a trial. Would I write it like this? I am worried about the man having held in prison without a trial. I want to delete the word 'being ' in this sentence. Is it correct ? Thanks
If you want to remove the word "being" from the sentence, you can rephrase it like this: "I am worried about the man held in prison without a trial." In this version, "held in prison without a trial" is a reduced relative clause modifying "the man." The sentence is grammatically correct and retains the same meaning.
For all you food-lover sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there is a fabulous new show call “The Thai Feast” having being created and produced by Tom Nguyen to begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut source. It is the most delicious thing on TV today.
Well done! Just 2 small mistakes. For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", CREATED and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
For all you food lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by To Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
having being held? Shouldn't it be having been held? Have should be followed by the past participle form of a verb, shouldnt it? I might be wrong. Please enlighten me.
Dear Prof, I was wondering if I might dare to ask you a question ? Is there any difference in meaning between these two sentences: A) I’m NO Angel B) I’m NOT an Angel Or A) I’m NO teacher B) I’m NOT a teacher. Thank you very much indeed. Wishing you and your own family a very happy Season's greetings". Andrea
Hi Andrea, 'Not a ____' can be a statement of fact. You are not a teacher, you are a lawyer. You are not American, you are French. I am not an angel. I am a human. This is a statement of fact. Although it can also be used as a judgement, 'no...' is a more stylish choice if you want that meaning. 'No ___' is a judgement - you are not worthy of being called that. You are no teacher, you are a mean bully. You are no American, you are a traitor to your country. I am no angel. Means that you certainly not angelic and do naughty things. It can be self-deprecating. I hope that helps!
Hi, can I use the perfect participle instead of using present participle? 1)There are two children having waited in the classroom. 2) The bananas having been dipped in chocolate were really yummy. Are these sentences correct?
In the first sentence, you can't use the perfect participle. It has to be "waiting." In the second, I added a comma after "bananas" for proper punctuation: "The bananas, having been dipped in chocolate, were really yummy." But otherwise it works. I hope that helps.
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today.
Dear lecturer, Could we begin a clause by (ing-phrase or ed-phrase) after an adjective clause reduced? For example: A man is a teacher. He works very smart. A man who works very smart is a teacher. A man working very smart is a teacher. Working very smart, a man is a teacher. A man is a teacher, working very smart.
Yes, you can begin a clause with an **-ing phrase** or **-ed phrase** after reducing an adjective clause. However, the placement and structure can affect the clarity and flow of the sentence. Let’s break down the examples you provided: 1. **Original Sentences:** - "A man is a teacher. He works very smart." 2. **Adjective Clause Reduced:** - "A man who works very smart is a teacher." Here, "who works very smart" is an adjective clause that describes "a man." 3. **Using an -ing Phrase:** - **"A man working very smart is a teacher."** This sentence is correct. "Working very smart" is a reduced form of the adjective clause "who works very smart" and is used as a participial phrase to describe "a man." 4. **Using -ing Phrase at the Beginning:** - **"Working very smart, a man is a teacher."** This construction is less common but still grammatically correct. It suggests that the man works very smart and is also a teacher. However, the positioning of the participial phrase at the beginning might create a slight ambiguity or awkwardness in some contexts. It’s often clearer to place the participial phrase immediately after the noun it describes. 5. **Using -ed Phrase:** - **"A man is a teacher, working very smart."** This construction is also correct but less typical. It implies that the man is a teacher and, additionally, he works very smart. It’s important to ensure the sentence clearly conveys the intended meaning, and the structure might feel a bit unusual. ### Key Points: - **Clarity:** Ensure that the participial phrase (either -ing or -ed) clearly modifies the noun and does not create confusion. - **Flow:** In formal writing, placing the participial phrase immediately after the noun it describes (e.g., "A man working very smart is a teacher") is often preferred for clarity and natural flow. **Summary:** - "A man working very smart is a teacher." (Clear and natural) - "Working very smart, a man is a teacher." (Possible, but less common; might be less clear) - "A man is a teacher, working very smart." (Correct but can feel awkward) The sentence **"A man working very smart is a teacher."** is generally the clearest and most conventional way to express the idea.
Can we use participles in non-defining relative clauses without two commas setting them off? //Saudi Arabia, which supports the Yemen government opposing the Houthis, believes Iran has been arming the group, including with the weapons used in the attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.// Here, "opposing" supposedly reduces ",which opposes the Houthis", a non-defining clause. But does it read OK?
The sentence as it stands is grammatically correct, but the use of the participle without additional commas may make it slightly less clear than a full relative clause. You can decide whether to prioritize grammatical economy or readability, depending on the audience.
For all u food lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting in tv this afternoon there's a fab new show called " the Thai feast" created and produced by Tom begining at 3.30 this afternoon among the dishes featured will be spicy prawns consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter deep fried and covered in a creamy peanut
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, There's a fabulous new show which is called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by Tom Nguyen, which begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be spicy Prawns, which consists of prawns dipped in a special batter, which have been deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today.
Hi, just a couple of things: For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. I hope that helps!
Hi, this is what I found in the dictionary. informal 1 -used to emphasize the statement that comes after it You know what? I never trusted her. She lied to me again, but you know what? I really just don't care anymore. 2 -used to get someone's attention Hey, you know what? I'm hungry. I hope that helps!
Can it be so that we use the present participle in the place of a simple aspect structure, not only in the place of a continuous aspect structure? (a continuous aspect structure from 2:20 - 2:33) There were teachers *shouting* and children *running* out of the school building. (= ... teachers *who were shouting* and children *who were running* ...) (simple aspect structures) The people *living* next door come from Russia. (= The people *who live* next door...) There was a sign on the gate *saying* "Entry forbidden". (= ... a sign on the gate *which says* ...) Rivers *flowing* into the Baltic Sea are much cleaner now than ten years ago. (= ... Rivers *which flow* into...) Anyone *needing* further information can see me in my office. (= Anyone *who needs* further ...) She had a kid *looking* just like you. (= a kid *who looked* just like you.)
Ok, let's try: For all you food-lovers SITTING at home and LOOKING for something INTERESTING on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show CALLED "The Thai Feast" CREATED and PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dished FEATURED will be Spicy Prawns CONSISTING of prawns DIPPED in a special batter, DEEP FRIED and COVERED in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today. ....thanks for reading and correcting. I am not sure about comma ( this ,,,,,, symbols)
Is it working? For all you food lovers SITTING at home and LOOKING for something BEING interesting on TV this afternoon, there is a fabulous new show CALLED ’the Thai Feast‘ HAVING BEEN CREATED and HAVING BEEN PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 pm this afternoon. Among the dishes FEATURED will be 'Spicy pawn' , CONSISTING of pawns HAVING BEEN DIPPED with special batter , HAVING BEEN DEEP-FRIED and COVERED in creamy peanut sauce. It is the most delicious thing on TV today.
well done! Just a couple of things: For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something INTERESTING on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", CREATED and PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns DIPPED in a special batter, DEEP-FRIED and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. I hope that helps!
![Diggy Graves - Red Vineyard [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8Ro085T0mnQ/mqdefault.jpg)
If you enjoyed this lesson could you do me a favour and HIT that like button on the video! Helps me a lot ❤ subscribe too so you don't miss the next lesson coming out! Thanks guys! 🙏🏻
Yes , subscribe your channel
Excellent Teacher
Thank you so much 😊
Perfect explanation! Gonna send this link to my SAT (ESL) students, so they don't confuse the main verb with a participle.
Thank you!
Thank you! Very helpful!
This is my answer: For all you food-lovers who sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, which begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisted of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
Well done! Just 2 small mistakes.
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
@oxfordenglishnow, can you please elaborate on it? Why did you use " created and produced" instead of "having being created" as per your passive perfect explanation? Though it is not suitable but i need clarification. Thank you
Very well explained ❤❤
Thanks a lot 😊
I have an exam for tomorrow and it was quite useful for me.Thanks😊
Happy to help!
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon , there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen begining at 3:30 this afternoon . Among the dishes being featured as Spicy Prawns , consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today .
I will be thankful if you correct my mistakes
Thank you for the video of course 👌
Great job
Thank you
Thank you 🙏🏼
I thoroughly enjoyed it. There was just one aspect that was slightly bothersome throughout the film, and that was the echo in the empty room. I think it would have been better to use soundproofing materials to reduce the reverb of your voices. However, overall it was excellent, and thank you.
Hi, I agree. Thanks for the heads up and it is something I am working on. 🙏🏻
I really like how you explain, you are amazing ❤❤❤
Thank you! 😃
... really super lesson...
Glad you think so!
Hi mam, the following is my question..
The ashes being immersed into the river..
Or
The ashes immersed into the river..
Mam What is the difference between being + past participle vs only past participle In a reduced adjective clause...
Hi, I would really need to see the sentences in context. Just like this neither of them make sense. Thanks
Hi dear prof . I wanna know what is the difference between (in which)and(where)in relative clauses. And thak you for your time
Both "in which" and "where" can be used in relative clauses, but they are used in slightly different contexts.
"In which":
This is often used when referring to a place or a specific location.
It is more formal and is commonly used with objects or places.
Example: "I visited the museum, in which I saw many ancient artifacts."
"Where":
"Where" is a more versatile relative pronoun and is used to refer to both places and situations.
It's more commonly used in everyday language and can replace "in which" in many contexts.
Example: "I visited the museum where I saw many ancient artifacts."
In summary, while both "in which" and "where" can introduce relative clauses, "in which" is often used in more formal contexts and is specific to places or objects. "Where" is a more general-purpose relative pronoun that can refer to both places and situations, and it is used in more informal language.
@@oxfordenglishnow thank you
Great video. I would also add the construction “be about to” to the list.
For example, the girl about to puke like is my sister Mabel (from Gravity Falls 😂)
Thanks for the tip. I will put it on my list of upcoming lessons. However your sentence doesn't make sense. Is it a quote from a song?
@@oxfordenglishnow missed the verb 😅
Good lesson
Thanks for watching
Teacher i need to ask something to you. If the sentence is future passive form can we reduct this sentence with to be v3? For example:
The book which will be relased tomorrow is mine
The book to be relased tomorrow is mine
Is this correct?
Yes, your transformation is almost correct, but there's a slight error in the wording. The correct transformation of "The book which will be released tomorrow is mine" to a reduced form would be:
"The book to be released tomorrow is mine."
You have the correct structure, but "relased" should be "released". Other than that, your transformation is accurate.
Yes, your transformation is almost correct, but there's a slight error in the wording. The correct transformation of "The book which will be released tomorrow is mine" to a reduced form would be:
"The book to be released tomorrow is mine."
You have the correct structure, but "relased" should be "released". Other than that, your transformation is accurate.
z
Thanks 🤗
Thank you very much madam
You are most welcome
Perfect 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
Thank you!
What is single action and sudden action? Please explain it further
A single action is simply something that happens once, while a sudden action is characterized by its quick and unexpected nature.
Very well
Thanks
There is one thing I couldn't understand regarding the topic:
"There are no items used."
"There are no used items."
For the sentences above, what is the difference between them?
By the way, I have liked and subscribed to your youtube channel.
Thanks for liking and subscribing to my channel!
The difference between the two sentences lies in the emphasis placed on the state of the items. Let's break it down:
"There are no items used.": In this sentence, the emphasis is on the action of using the items. It suggests that there are items, but none of them have been used. The focus is on the absence of the action of using.
"There are no used items.": Here, the emphasis is on the state of the items themselves. It implies that there may be items present, but none of them are in a used condition. The focus is on the absence of items that have already been used.
In summary, the first sentence emphasizes the lack of action (using), while the second emphasizes the lack of a specific condition (being used).
I hope that helps!
@@oxfordenglishnow Thank you very much. You couldn't have explained it better. There is only one question left that I would like you to answer:
We can use past and present participles as adjectives, for example: broken legs, shining stars.
The thing that I can't understand is what the thing that indicates which one of the participles I can use is.
In other words, can we use "shined stars" and "breaking windows"? If so, how can I understand which one is more convenient to use than the other?
I want to say thank you again for your feedback.
can I try?
For alll you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabuluos new show called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by Tom Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today
by the way, is there any regulations on using 'which' or 'that' in relative clause?
Why did you use " created and produced" as a perfect passive tense in the original text?
Great work! Well done!
Check out my lessons on defining and non-defining relative clauses here.
ruclips.net/video/a_mFlafGyy8/видео.html
Excuse me! Teacher. I am worried about the man who has been held in prison without a trial. Would I write it like this? I am worried about the man having held in prison without a trial. I want to delete the word 'being ' in this sentence. Is it correct ? Thanks
If you want to remove the word "being" from the sentence, you can rephrase it like this:
"I am worried about the man held in prison without a trial."
In this version, "held in prison without a trial" is a reduced relative clause modifying "the man." The sentence is grammatically correct and retains the same meaning.
For all you food-lover sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there is a fabulous new show call “The Thai Feast” having being created and produced by Tom Nguyen to begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut source. It is the most delicious thing on TV today.
Well done! Just 2 small mistakes.
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", CREATED and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
For all you food lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by To Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured Spicy Prawns, consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
Great work! well done!
having being held? Shouldn't it be having been held? Have should be followed by the past participle form of a verb, shouldnt it? I might be wrong. Please enlighten me.
Hi, yes, well spotted this is an error. It is correct in the subtitles. But thanks for flagging it.
Dear Prof,
I was wondering if I might dare to ask you a question ? Is there any difference in meaning between these two sentences:
A) I’m NO Angel
B) I’m NOT an Angel
Or
A) I’m NO teacher
B) I’m NOT a teacher.
Thank you very much indeed. Wishing you and your own family a very happy Season's greetings". Andrea
Hi Andrea,
'Not a ____' can be a statement of fact.
You are not a teacher, you are a lawyer.
You are not American, you are French.
I am not an angel. I am a human. This is a statement of fact.
Although it can also be used as a judgement, 'no...' is a more stylish choice if you want that meaning.
'No ___' is a judgement - you are not worthy of being called that.
You are no teacher, you are a mean bully.
You are no American, you are a traitor to your country.
I am no angel. Means that you certainly not angelic and do naughty things. It can be self-deprecating.
I hope that helps!
Hi, can I use the perfect participle instead of using present participle?
1)There are two children having waited in the classroom.
2) The bananas having been dipped in chocolate were really yummy.
Are these sentences correct?
In the first sentence, you can't use the perfect participle. It has to be "waiting."
In the second, I added a comma after "bananas" for proper punctuation:
"The bananas, having been dipped in chocolate, were really yummy." But otherwise it works. I hope that helps.
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, beginning at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today.
Fantastic! Well done!
@@oxfordenglishnow Thank you, Teacher. 🙏❤️
I m from India please request
Upload videos on difference between such as like likely live lively hard hardly
Welcome to my channel! Thank you for the suggestion!
Dear lecturer,
Could we begin a clause by (ing-phrase or ed-phrase) after an adjective clause reduced?
For example:
A man is a teacher. He works very smart.
A man who works very smart is a teacher.
A man working very smart is a teacher.
Working very smart, a man is a teacher.
A man is a teacher, working very smart.
I just want to know if last two sentences is correct or not.
Yes, you can begin a clause with an **-ing phrase** or **-ed phrase** after reducing an adjective clause. However, the placement and structure can affect the clarity and flow of the sentence. Let’s break down the examples you provided:
1. **Original Sentences:**
- "A man is a teacher. He works very smart."
2. **Adjective Clause Reduced:**
- "A man who works very smart is a teacher."
Here, "who works very smart" is an adjective clause that describes "a man."
3. **Using an -ing Phrase:**
- **"A man working very smart is a teacher."**
This sentence is correct. "Working very smart" is a reduced form of the adjective clause "who works very smart" and is used as a participial phrase to describe "a man."
4. **Using -ing Phrase at the Beginning:**
- **"Working very smart, a man is a teacher."**
This construction is less common but still grammatically correct. It suggests that the man works very smart and is also a teacher. However, the positioning of the participial phrase at the beginning might create a slight ambiguity or awkwardness in some contexts. It’s often clearer to place the participial phrase immediately after the noun it describes.
5. **Using -ed Phrase:**
- **"A man is a teacher, working very smart."**
This construction is also correct but less typical. It implies that the man is a teacher and, additionally, he works very smart. It’s important to ensure the sentence clearly conveys the intended meaning, and the structure might feel a bit unusual.
### Key Points:
- **Clarity:** Ensure that the participial phrase (either -ing or -ed) clearly modifies the noun and does not create confusion.
- **Flow:** In formal writing, placing the participial phrase immediately after the noun it describes (e.g., "A man working very smart is a teacher") is often preferred for clarity and natural flow.
**Summary:**
- "A man working very smart is a teacher." (Clear and natural)
- "Working very smart, a man is a teacher." (Possible, but less common; might be less clear)
- "A man is a teacher, working very smart." (Correct but can feel awkward)
The sentence **"A man working very smart is a teacher."** is generally the clearest and most conventional way to express the idea.
@@oxfordenglishnow Great! Thank you so much, professor. I would appreciate your detail explanation.
@@oxfordenglishnow Anyway, could I get your telegram? I have some questions in grammar lessons.
Good ❤❤❤
Welcome to my channel!
Can we use participles in non-defining relative clauses without two commas setting them off?
//Saudi Arabia, which supports the Yemen government opposing the Houthis, believes Iran has been arming the group, including with the weapons used in the attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.//
Here, "opposing" supposedly reduces ",which opposes the Houthis", a non-defining clause. But does it read OK?
The sentence as it stands is grammatically correct, but the use of the participle without additional commas may make it slightly less clear than a full relative clause. You can decide whether to prioritize grammatical economy or readability, depending on the audience.
For all u food lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting in tv this afternoon there's a fab new show called " the Thai feast" created and produced by Tom begining at 3.30 this afternoon among the dishes featured will be spicy prawns consisting of prawns dipped in a special batter deep fried and covered in a creamy peanut
Fantastic! well done!
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, There's a fabulous new show which is called "The Thai Feast" created and produced by Tom Nguyen, which begins at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be spicy Prawns, which consists of prawns dipped in a special batter, which have been deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today.
Hi, just a couple of things:
For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something interesting on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", created and produced by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns dipped in a special batter, deep-fried and covered in a creamy peanut sauce.
I hope that helps!
@@oxfordenglishnow thanks so much
You know what?.
What does it mean, Please reply
Hi, this is what I found in the dictionary.
informal
1
-used to emphasize the statement that comes after it
You know what? I never trusted her.
She lied to me again, but you know what? I really just don't care anymore.
2
-used to get someone's attention
Hey, you know what? I'm hungry.
I hope that helps!
Can it be so that we use the present participle in the place of a simple aspect structure, not only in the place of a continuous aspect structure?
(a continuous aspect structure from 2:20 - 2:33)
There were teachers *shouting* and children *running* out of the school building. (= ... teachers *who were shouting* and children *who were running* ...)
(simple aspect structures)
The people *living* next door come from Russia. (= The people *who live* next door...)
There was a sign on the gate *saying* "Entry forbidden". (= ... a sign on the gate *which says* ...)
Rivers *flowing* into the Baltic Sea are much cleaner now than ten years ago. (= ... Rivers *which flow* into...)
Anyone *needing* further information can see me in my office. (= Anyone *who needs* further ...)
She had a kid *looking* just like you. (= a kid *who looked* just like you.)
Oh, yeah, I can see that further in the video. 3:48
Great. Glad I answered your query.
Ok, let's try: For all you food-lovers SITTING at home and LOOKING for something INTERESTING on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show CALLED "The Thai Feast" CREATED and PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dished FEATURED will be Spicy Prawns CONSISTING of prawns DIPPED in a special batter, DEEP FRIED and COVERED in a creamy peanut sauce. It's the most delicious thing on TV today. ....thanks for reading and correcting. I am not sure about comma ( this ,,,,,, symbols)
Fantastic! Only little thing is that it is dishes and not dished but I presume that was a typo. The commas look good too.
Is it working?
For all you food lovers SITTING at home and LOOKING for something BEING interesting on TV this afternoon, there is a fabulous new show CALLED ’the Thai Feast‘ HAVING BEEN CREATED and HAVING BEEN PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 pm this afternoon. Among the dishes FEATURED will be 'Spicy pawn' , CONSISTING of pawns HAVING BEEN DIPPED with special batter , HAVING BEEN DEEP-FRIED and COVERED in creamy peanut sauce. It is the most delicious thing on TV today.
well done! Just a couple of things: For all you food-lovers sitting at home and looking for something INTERESTING on TV this afternoon, there's a fabulous new show called "The Thai Feast", CREATED and PRODUCED by Tom Nguyen, BEGINNING at 3:30 this afternoon. Among the dishes featured will be Spicy Prawns, CONSISTING of prawns DIPPED in a special batter, DEEP-FRIED and covered in a creamy peanut sauce. I hope that helps!
Love🎉🎉🎉
Thank you!
I have an exam for tomorrow and it was helped a lot.Thanks😊
Most welcome 😊