AtoZ:

Hi, I have a question about s&t.

Q: John cheated in the examination. It was very silly of him.
__________________ to _______________.

A(1): it was very silly of John to have cheated in the examination.
A(2): it was very silly of John to cheat in the examination.

May I know which answer is correct and why?

Thanks in advance!

Hello there,

I'm afraid I have a different view from 45has and would like to suggest A(2) as the better answer.

To explain this, I'll use a commonplace expression -

\"It was nice to meet you at the restaurant.\"

If we were to revert this expression into its active constituents, they will likely be -

\"I met you at the restaurant. It was nice.\"

This example is structurally almost identical to the question and I hope this helps you see why A(2) is the acceptable answer.

\"John cheated (past tense) in the examination. It was very silly of him.\"
\"I met (past tense) you at the restaurant. It was nice.\"

\"It was very silly of John to cheat (present tense) in the examination.\"
\"It was nice to meet (present tense) you at the restaurant.\"

A(1) would be the better answer if the question had read \"John has cheated in the examination. It was very silly of him.\"

Hope this helps!


Christopher Chye
Director, MOOT Singapore
Tel: (65) 9632 4747
Web: http://www.moot.sg

Jamesbond:

\"Can you tell me where the nearest post office is?\" The old man asked Yuling.


Given answer
The old man asked Yuling where the nearest post office was.

My answer
The old man asked Yuling if she could tell him where the nearest post office was.

My answer sounds wrong to me too....can somebody give me explanation.

Hello there,

While both answers are grammatical, your answer is the better one in this case.

If the question had read \"\"Where is the nearest post office?\" The old man asked Yuling.\", then the given answer would have been the better one.

In this case, the question the old man asked warranted a binary reply - either \"yes\" or \"no\". The little girl's response should reflect either her ability or willingness to address the old man's question by first saying \"yes\" or \"no\". Your answer correctly captures this quality by the use of \"if she could tell him\".

Of course in colloquial use, we know that the old man really intended to ask for directions but as a language question, we should be strict with the linguistic rules and not accept the given answer as the right one.

Hope this helps!


Christopher Chye
Director, MOOT Singapore
Tel: (65) 9632 4747
Web: http://www.moot.sg

Jamesbond:

Timothy asked Lynn, \" Why did you bring your dog here?\"

Given answer
Timothy asked Lynn why she had taken her dog there.
My answer
Timothy asked Lynn why she had brought her dog there.
I feel mine is correct...pl help.

Hello there,

I'm afraid the given answer is correct and the determining factor lies in the words \"here\" and \"there\".

We use \"bring\" when we wish for someone to transport an object to where we are. Thus, we could ask someone to \"bring an object here\".

We use \"take\" when we wish for someone to transport an object from a starting point to somewhere away from us. Thus, we could ask someone to \"take an object there\".

In this case, you have correctly identified that \"here\" had to be changed to \"there\" when in reported speech. Since the dog had to be transported \"there\", the suitable verb to choose is \"had taken\", in the past perfect form of course.

Hope this helps!


Warmest regards,
Christopher Chye
Director, MOOT Singapore
Tel: (65) 9632 4747
Web: http://www.moot.sg

Jamesbond:

Trevortan:

[quote=\"Jamesbond\"]Lucy said that her husband and her

Lucy said that her husband and she

The usage of she, her.....which is appropriate?

\"Lucy said that her husband and her\" is more appropriate since
1. \"Her\" is a possessive pronoun, and there is a possession (Lucy) in this sentence.
2. \"Lucy said that her husband and she\" just doesn't sound right.

Thx a lot.[/quote]
Hi there I'd like to offer an alternative view.

My tip for demystifying such confusions is to simply complete the sentence and you'll immediately puzzle out the correct answer for yourself.

Let's imagine that the couple had dinner at Ritz Carlton.

Version 1 (The correct version)
\"Lucy said that her husband and she had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"
This can be separated into 2 parts -
1. \"Lucy said that her husband had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"
2. \"Lucy said that she had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"

Both sentences fall into place perfectly and grammatically.
Now consider Version 2.

Version 2 (The incorrect version)
\"Lucy said that her husband and her had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"
Likewise, we'll separate this into 2 parts -
1. \"Lucy said that her husband had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"
2. \"Lucy said that her had dinner at Ritz Carlton.\"

Almost immediately, you'll note that \"her had dinner\" in part 2 is wrong, rendering Version 2 wrong.

Colloquially, we often say \"her husband and her are lawyers\". Do help your child be aware that this is a common mistake and the right expression reads \"her husband and she are lawyers\".

To achieve linguistic precision, I encourage you to avoid a reliance on what sounds right. Instead, exercise discipline in drilling down to the fundamental rules of grammar and your child will be able to better navigate through the cesspit of erroneous English we're surrounded by every day.

Hope this helps!


Christopher Chye
Director, MOOT Singapore
Web: http://www.moot.sg
Tel: +65 9632 4747

Dear Parents,


I completely empathise with your desire for your child to achieve excellence in their General Paper (GP) examinations. Linguistic mastery forms the cornerstones of academic and corporate success and it's crucial that the fundamentals are fostered snugly from a tender age. GP can also play a pivotal role in securing admissions into a number of highly contested university courses and could be the deciding factor in your child's professional future.

While grammatical rules can be memorised through rote learning, a natural application of the language comes with consistent practice and repeated exposure to good English.

For your child to tackle his or her GP examinations with ease, he or she needs to first demonstrate fluency with the language in every-day situations. It would be unwise to imagine that they can achieve isolated excellence in their examinations if they are not already using the language competently in their daily interactions with others.

MOOT was established precisely to plug this gap in our education system. Your child will be allowed to interact with other peers in guided conversations, so that he or she can feel safe practising English in a natural setting and have any mistakes corrected immediately by a proficient instructor.

Fun is, of course, an inherent part of the process so you can rest assured that your child will start being excited by the very thought of intellectual discourse and begin to view each examination as an exciting challenge that he or she can confidently handle.

If this sounds like a splendid idea to you, do visit http://moot.sg to find out more about how our programme will be of enormous use in helping your child improve his or her linguistic fluency and, in time, wield the language with confidence and style!

Do feel free to drop me a call at (65) 9632 4747 and I'll be glad to assist you further.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ2njWiggR0][/youtube]

Warm regards,
Christopher Chye
Director and Chief Adjudicator
MOOT Singapore
Tel: (65) 9632 4747
Web: http://moot.sg

http://www.moot.sg/Anymeeting%20Logo.png\">

Dear Parents,


I completely empathise with your desire for your child to achieve excellence in their English Language examinations. Linguistic mastery forms the cornerstones of academic and corporate success and it's crucial that the fundamentals are fostered snugly from a tender age.

While grammatical rules can be memorised through rote learning, a natural application of these rules comes with consistent practice and repeated exposure to sound grammatical structures.

For your child to tackle his or her written and oral examinations with ease, he or she needs to first demonstrate fluency with the language in every-day situations. It would be unwise to imagine that they can achieve isolated excellence in their examinations if they are not already using the language competently in their daily interactions with others.

MOOT was established precisely to plug this gap in our education system. Your child will be allowed to interact with other children in guided conversations, so that he or she can feel safe practising English in a natural setting and have any mistakes corrected immediately by a proficient instructor.

Fun is, of course, an inherent part of the process so you can rest assured that your child will start being excited by the very thought of intellectual discourse!

If this sounds like a great idea to you, do visit http://moot.sg to find out more about how our programme will be of enormous use in helping your child improve his or her grammar and, in time, wield the language with confidence and style!

Do feel free to drop me a call at (65) 9632 4747 and I'll be glad to assist you further.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ2njWiggR0][/youtube]

Warm regards,
Christopher Chye
Director and Chief Adjudicator
MOOT Singapore
Tel: (65) 9632 4747
Web: http://moot.sg

http://www.moot.sg/Anymeeting%20Logo.png\">

slmkhoo:

45has:

could

might
cubs
me....he
might

The 3rd one should be \"pups\" (although \"kits\" is more common).
The 4th one should be \"I (am)...he (is)\".

Hello there,

I think it was very perceptive of slmkhoo to have pointed out that Question 4 was erroneous.

\"Taller than me\" is a pervasive mistake among many users of the language and the person who set the question should be informed of his or her error, especially if he or she is an educator.

The expression \"taller than I am\" follows from -
\"I am tall. He is taller than I am.\"

\"Taller than me is wrong because it would have followed from -
\"Me is tall. He is taller than me.\"


I would point out that Question 5 is also quite poorly set.

5.They ______win, provided that their star player performed well.
a) would
b)might
c)may
d)shall

Any phrase that follows the word \"provided\" is a conditional clause. The event that the clause describes should not have taken place yet and should thus be constructed in present tense.

For example, you would say -
\"John could grow taller, provided that he eats well.\"

You would not say -
\"John could grow taller, provided that he ate well.\"

Both growing taller and eating well are future events and should thus necessitate the present tense.

So the error in Question 5 lies in the word \"performed\", where it should have been \"performs\".

The best answer I would suggest is \"would\" -
\"They would win, provided that the star player performs well.\"

I suppose the question setter could have been going for -
\"They might have won if the star player had performed well.\"

Using a provisional conjunction such as \"if\" allows the sentence to be constructed in past or past-perfect tenses.


Hope this helps!

Christopher Chye
Director of MOOT Singapore
Web: http://www.moot.sg
Tel: +65 9632 4747

slmkhoo:

Jamesbond:

Both Sally and Jane have no qualms turning up early for work.


Neither...............nor....................
Neither Sally nor Jane has any qualms turning up early for work.
Neither Sally nor Jane has any qualms about turning up early for work.

Which of the above is correct?

\"No qualms\" is usually followed by \"about\". The first sounds OK to me too, but it's probably safer with \"about\".

While both sentences are grammatical, the preferred answer will be the first sentence since the preposition \"about\" was absent from the original statement in the first place.

\"About\" is superfluous (meaning unnecessary) in this case, just as the preposition \"with\" is superfluous in the following example:

John is alright with traveling alone.
John is alright traveling alone.

Hence, both sentences describing Sally and Jane's indifference for turning up early are grammatical, but the first answer is better suited for this particular question only because the original question did not contain the preposition \"about\".

Hope this helps!


Christopher Chye
Director, MOOT Singapore
Web: http://www.moot.sg
Tel: +65 9632 4747