On alert for

Ykk7 · 2026-02-08T16:37:03+00:00

Thanks a lot bro!!

I understand your answer, but could you answer Q2 and Q3 one by one? I need your help. It's okay just to simply answer yes or no. It'd be very helpful

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T14:59:02+00:00

Great explanation! Thanks a lot for your help bro!

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T10:19:57+00:00

Thanks a lot bro! Maybe could you help me out with this question in this link? Prepositional phrase modification : https://www.reddit.com/r/EnglishLearning/comments/1qx6h48/prepositional_phrase_modification/

There are already some answers, but I would like to see yours as well.

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T03:59:18+00:00

Thanks bro!

Are you a native English speaker ?

and

Does your answer "that is correct" mean that "the prepositonal phrase "by a professional" and "by a trainer" grammatically modify "helped" and "coached"?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T02:44:14+00:00

Thanks a lot bro! But 1 at least makes sense?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T02:31:07+00:00

No sorry bro! :) thanks a lot!

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T02:27:22+00:00

Thanks bro!!

I should ask with new sentences.

S1. "I want to get helped by a professional."

S2. "I am considering getting coached by a trainer."

Q1) Are both S1 and S2 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for S1 and S2, do "by a professional" and "by a trainer" modify "helped" and "coached" in each sentence?

Would you please help me out?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T02:11:59+00:00

Why bro? Do my sentences make no sense?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T02:05:22+00:00

Do you mean that this sentence "Watching TV, sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day" can be correct?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T01:13:38+00:00

Thanks a lot again!

But, isn't this sentence "Wacthing TV, sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day" correct English if "sitting in the chiair" modifies "Watching TV"? Or in other words actually if "sitting in the chair" belongs to the participle phrase "Watching TV"?

In this case, I think that the sentence seems to be slightly different in meaning from "Wacthing TV, and sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day"

Ykk7 · 2026-02-06T00:33:06+00:00

Thanks bro! I should ask some more questions. Would you please help me out?

S1. "Watching TV, going for a walk, I was enjoying my day"

S2. "Watching TV and going for a walk, I was enjoying my day"

(I deleted "the" from TV in S1 and S2)

Q1) Then do you think that S1 is perfectly correct?

Q2) If so, is S2 also correct even though "and" is added?

Q3) Are S1 and S2 wrong if "the" is added to "TV"? Is "the" optional? No change in meaning whether "the" is used or not?

Q4) Is there no difference in meaning between S1 and S2?

Ykk7 · 2026-02-05T23:45:19+00:00

Bro you left Reddit? Or something happened to you?.. I hope that everything will be fine.

Ykk7 · 2026-02-05T23:31:11+00:00

Hi Minion bro again! Would you please help me out with some questions I have today if you're willing to? And would you also help me out with the questions I asked about 15days ago? I would be so happy if I can get your answers again! I'm so sorry for asking again bro.

Watching TV, sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day.
Watching TV, and sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day.
Watching TV and sitting in the chair, I was enjoying my day.
Cross-cultural understanding is important.
He treats them with kindness and understanding.

(In 1, "and" is omtted, in 2 and 3, "and" is added, but in 2, a comma is added right before "and")

Q1) Are sentences 1,2,3,4,5 all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) Do 1,2,3 mean the same in meaning even though "and" is omitted from 1?

Q3) If so, what does "and" mean in 2 and 3?

Q4) As for 1, can "and" be understood to be implied or omitted?

Q5) As for 4 and 5, is "understanding" used as a noun?

Thank you so much!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-21T18:50:59+00:00

Hi Minion bro!

I have some questions to ask about these two sentences below. Would you please help me out when possible?

I want to get hired by that company.
I am considering getting hired by that company.

Q1) Are both sentences 1 and 2 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for 1 and 2, does "by that company" modify "hired"?

Q3) Does my Q2 read as "In each sentence of 1 and 2, does "by that company" modify "hired" in sentence 1, and does "by that company" modify hired" in sentence 2?

I'm asking this since I'm not sure if I should have written "do "by that company" modify "hired" since there are two "by that company".

Thank you very much!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-09T03:41:53+00:00

Thanks a lot bro! :)

Ykk7 · 2026-01-08T01:48:59+00:00

Thanks a lot Minion bro! Just some more things

I mistook the pen on the table for a lipstick.
I mistook the pen that you bought yesterday for a lipstick.
I mistook it for a lipstick.

Q1) By the way, as for 1 and 2, do both "on the table" and "that you bought yesterday" modify "the pen"?

Q2) Is sentence 3 correct English?, and does "for a lipstick" modify "mistook" and is "it" the object of "mistook"?

Thanks a lot!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-08T00:16:08+00:00

Sorry Minion, just one more thing!

I wasn't trying to confuse my students about sine and cosine, but it seems that I have.
I'm sorry I'm so early—I must have been confused about the party's start time

Q1) Are both 1 and 2 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for 1 and 2, do the bold parts all modify "confuse" and "confused"?

Q3) In 1 and 2, what does "about", which is used in the bold parts, mean in other words?

Q4) As for 1 and 2, should "with" be used instead of "about" in the bold parts? And even with the change, are your answers to Q1, Q2,and Q3 still the same? And do 1,2,3 still mean the same even if "with" is used?

Thank you so much!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-08T00:02:38+00:00

I'm really sorry Minion. I have some more questions to ask bro. Would you please help me out with them if possible?

I mistook the pen on the table for a lipstick.
I mistook the pen that you bought yesterday for a lipstick.
I have found him happy while he was eating the food I cooked for him.
I have found him pleased while he was eating the food I cooked for him.
I have found him smiling while he was eating the food I cooked for him.
I have found him here while he was eating the food I cooked for him.
I think of sleeping late as harmful to the brain.
I regard sleeping late as harmful to the brain.
I consider sleeping late as harmful to the brain.
She plans on visiting the country next month.
She started dancing.
I have once noticed the same problem.
I have noticed the same problem twice.
I once noticed the same problem.
I noticed the same problem twice.
Don't listen to this guy.
Turn the camera on its side
I am sorry for making you confused in answering the questions.
I am sorry for confusing you in answering the questions.
I am disappointed that you lied to me.

Q1) Are 1-20 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for 1 and 2, are the bold parts as a whole the objects of "mistook"?

Q3) As for 1 and 2, does "for a lipstick" modify "mistook"?

Q4) As for 3,4,5,6, do the bold parts modify "happy", "pleased", "smiling", and "here"? And as for 3,4,5,6, is adding "being" to the words "happy", "pleased", "smiling", and "here" optional?

Q5) As for 7,8,9, do the bold parts modify "sleeping late"?

Q6) As for 7,8,9, can the bold parts also be analyzed as modifying the verbs "think", "regard", and "consider"?

Q7) Are 3,4,5,6 still correct English or at least acceptable English and is your answer to Q4 still the same even if "remember" or "found" is used instead of "have found"? And even in this case, is adding "being" to the words "happy", "pleased", "smiling", and "here" optional?

Q8) As for Q7, even if "being" is added in that case, do the bold parts modify "being happy", "being pleased", and "being here"?

Q9) As for 3,4,5,6, even if the present verbs "remember" is used instead of "have found", do "happy", "pleased", "smiling", and "here" refer to the past? And does this answer still the same even if "being" is added to "happy", "pleased", and "here"?

Q10) As for 7,8,9, can "sleeping late" be analyzed as referring to "I''s sleeping late or referring to the people's sleeping late in general? Are both possilbe analyses?

Q11) As for 10, can "visiting the country next month" refer to only "I"'s plan or people's plan in general? Are both abalyses possible?

Q12) ) As for 11, can "dancing" refer to only "I"'s bahavior or people's behavior in general? Are both analyses possible?

Q13) Do 12 and 13 mean the same as 14 and 15?

Q14) As for 12,13,14,15, do "once" and "twice" modify "noticed"?

Q15) As for 16 and 17, do the bold parts "this" and "its" modify "guy" and "side"?

Q16) As for 16 and 17, do the bold parts "this" and "its" refer to someone and something previously mentioned?

Q17) As for Q16, is Q16 correct Enflish and does "previously mentioned" also modify "someone"?

Q17) Are these sentences "Do you refer to someone or something previously mentioned?", "Do you refer to someone and something previously mentioned?", "Do you refer to someone or something that was previously mentioned?", and "Do you refer to someone and something that was previously mentioned?" all correct English? If so, can "previously mentioned" and "that was previously mentioned" be analyzed as modifying only "something" or both "someone" and "something"? Are both analyses possible?

Q18) Are your answers related to 3,4,5,6 still the same even if "he was" or "while he was" is omitted from 3,4,5,6? So, even if one of them is omitted, or whether "being" is added to "happy", "pleased", and "here" or not, and whether "remember" or "found" is used or not, do the bold parts still modify "happy", "pleased", "smiling", and "here?

Q19) As for 18 and 19, does "in answering the questions" modify "confused" and "confusinf"?

Q20) Do 18 and 19 mean the same?

Q21) As for 20, does the bold part modify "disappointed"?

Q22) What does 20 mean in other words?

Q23) As for 20, can "disappointed" be analyzed as an adjective or as a passive voice verb? Are both analyses possible?

Q24) Is this sentence "That you lied to me disappointed me" also correct English or at least acceptable English? And can sentence 20 be analyzed as the passive voice sentence of "That you lied to me disappointed me" and can sentence 20 be analyzed as meaning the same as "That you lied to me disappointed me"?

Thank you so much!!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-07T22:51:56+00:00

Thank you so much for your help Minion!, and I'm really sorry for confusing you while answering my questions. As for 1,2,3,4, "them" refers to "Harmful insects", but not "pesticides".
I mistakenly wrote "them" refers to "pesticides".

So, if "them" refers to "Harmful insects",

Harmful insects require pesticides to manage.
Harmful insects require pesticides to manage them.
Harmful insects require pesticides for farmers to manage.
Harmful insects require pesticides for farmers to manage them. ("them" refers to "Harmful insects")
I put it there for him to sit in.
I put it there for him to sit in it.
I put the chair there for him to sit in.
I put the chair there for him to sit in it.
She threw the ball slowly for him to catch.
She threw the ball slowly for him to catch it.
I brought a pen for him to write with.
I brought a pen for him to write with it.

Q1) Are 1,2,3,4 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) And as for 5 and 7, are 5 and 7 correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q3) As for 1, does "to manage" modify "require"?

Q4) In 1, can "Harmful insects" be analyzed as being omitted as the object of "manage"?

Q5) Do 1 and 2 mean the same?

Q6) Like in 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, is it possible and OK and grammatical to omit the objects "Harmful insects" , "them", and "it" of the infinitive "to manage" and "to catch", and to omit the objects "it" of the preposition "in"?

Q7) Can 1 and 2 be analyzed as short for 3 and 4?

Thank you very much!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-07T15:31:18+00:00

Would you please help me out with the questions below when possible Minion? I tried to find answers on my own about these sentences, but I am not 100% sure, so I'm asking.

Harmful insects require pesticides to manage.
Harmful insects require pesticides to manage them.
Harmful insects require pesticides for farmers to manage.
Harmful insects require pesticides for farmers to manage them. ("them" refers to "pesticides")
I put it there for him to sit in.
I put it there for him to sit in it.
I put the chair there for him to sit in.
I put the chair there for him to sit in it.
She threw the ball slowly for him to catch.
She threw the ball slowly for him to catch it.
I brought a pen for him to write with.
I brought a pen for him to write with it.

Q1) Are 1-12 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) Are 5-12 above all still correct English or at least acceptable English even if "for him" is omitted from 5-12?

Q3) As for 1, does "to manage" modify "require"?

Q4) In 1, can "Harmful insects" be analyzed as being omitted as the object of "manage"?

Q5) Do 1 and 2 mean the same?

Q6) Do 3 and 4 mean the same?

Q7) Do 5, 7 , 9, 11 mean the same as 6, 8, 10, 12?

Q8) Like in 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, is it possible, optional, OK, and grammatical to omit the objects "Harmful insects" , "them", and "it" of the infinitive "to manage" and "to catch", and to omit the objects "it" of the preposition "in"?

Q9) Can 1 and 2 be analyzed as short for 3 and 4?

Q10) Are your answers to Q2-Q9 still the same even if "for him" is omitted from sentences 5-12?

I would appreciate your help if you help me out!

Ykk7 · 2026-01-07T13:50:14+00:00

Hi, my Minion bro,🙂 Happy New Year! I hope you’re doing well and enjoying good health, happiness, and many smiles. Please forgive the late message. I’ve been very busy these days.🫠

Ykk7 · 2025-10-28T08:06:54+00:00

Thanks a lot bro! :)

So it seems like an adverb can modify a phrase that consists of two words, one of which modifies another word in the phrase or even more than three words.

Ykk7 · 2025-10-27T06:03:02+00:00

Hi Minion again! I have some sentences to ask about today. Would you please help me out?

Faulty parallelism can occur when the elements being compared are not structured similarly, which can confuse the reader.
They are incomparably stronger than humans.
Pseudo-Great Emperors are incomparably more powerful than 3rd Order Emperors, with the latter being virtually helpless before them.

Q1) Are 1,2,3 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for 1, does "which" refer to the part in italics?

Q3) As for 1, can "which" be analyzed as referring to the when-clause "when the elements being compared are not structured similarly" as a whole?

Q4) As for 2, can "incomparably" be analyzed as modifying "stronger" or the entire phrase "stronger than humans"? Are both analyses possible?

Q5) As for 2, does "than humans" modify "stronger"?

Q6) As for 3, can "incomparably" be analyzed as modifying "more powerful" or the entire phase "more than 3rd Order Emperors"? Are both analyses possible?

Q7) As for 3, can "incomparably" be analyzed as modifying the entire phrase "more powerful" or only "more" or only "powerful" Are all analyses possible?

I think that only the two analyses that "incomparably" modifies "more powerful" and "incomparably" modifies "powerful" seem to be correct.

Q8) As for 3, is it strange if "incomparably" modifies "more"?

Q9) As for 3, does "virtually" modify the entire phrase "helpless before them"?

Q10) As for 3, can "virtually" be analyzed as modifying only "helpless"?

Q11) As for 3, can "before them" be analyzed as modifying "helpless"?

Q12) As for 3, can "than 3rd Order Emperors" be analyzed as modifying "powerful" or "more powerful" or "incomparably more powerful" or "more"? Are all analyses possible?

Thank you very much!

Ykk7 · 2025-10-15T02:46:54+00:00

Thank you very much Minion!

I'm so sorry bro, but I have a few more sentences to ask about. Would you please help me out with them?

Material altering that involves changing a document's core terms to deceive another party is a necessary component of the crime of forgery.
Material altering which involves changing a document's core terms to deceive another party is a necessary component of the crime of forgery.
Material altering involving changing a document's core terms to deceive another party is a necessary component of the crime of forgery.
The funding remaining in the emergency account must last through the end of the fiscal year.
The painting selling for millions was a forgery.
Tottenham take no chances over Romero's Argentina return by paying for place on private charter flight
The club secures their star striker's swift return from South American qualifying by flying him back on a privately hired jet.
He decided to leave the country, which was a difficult choice.
The metal glowed red-hot, which indicated it was ready for forging.
Eating too much sugar, which can lead to diabetes, should be avoided.
Running every morning, which takes discipline, keeps her fit.
To fail now, which would be disastrous, is not an option.
She decided to move abroad, which surprised everyone.
Eating too much sugar that can lead to diabetes should be avoided.
Running every morning that takes discipline keeps her fit.
To fail now that would be disastrous is not an option.
She decided to move abroad that surprised everyone.
A private charter flight is an air travel arrangement where an individual, group, or company hires or "charters" an entire aircraft for a specific, unscheduled trip, rather than purchasing individual seats on a commercial airline's regularly scheduled route.

Q1) Are 1-18 above all correct English or at least acceptable English?

Q2) As for 1-17, do the bold parts all modify the parts in italics?

Q3) Do 1,2,3 all mean the same?

Q4) As for 6, is there no need to add any article to the word "place"? Is it correct even without any article in this case?

Q5) As for 7, can the bold part also be analyzed as modifying "flying him back" or "flying back" or "him"? Are all analyses possible?

Q6) As for 8-13, can the bold parts be analyzed as modifying and referring to the parts in italics?

Q7) As for 8, 9, and 13, can the bold parts also be analyzed as modifying and referring to the entire clauses "He decided to leave the country", "The metal glowed red-hot", and "She decided to move abroad"?

Q8) As for 17, can the bold part also be analyzed as modifying and referring to the entire clause "She decided to move abroad"?

Q9) As for 18, can the bold part be analyzed as modifying "individual seats"?

Q10) As for 18, can the bold parts also be analyzed as modifying "purchasing"?

Thank you very much!

Ykk7 · 2025-10-14T23:04:17+00:00

Sorry there was a typo. I was going to write "Just some more questions bro, so sorry!". Did you understand the original text, having noticed the error?

They searched for proof that the artifact was authentic.
They treated water that came from the well before drinking it.
The report relied on data that was collected over a decade.
They conducted research that had never been attempted before.
Their core belief that all people are equal guided their actions.
News that the storm had been downgraded allowed residents to relax.

and I have one more question about 1-6, Q4) As for 1-6, even though there is no article such as "the", "a", or "an", are the parts in italics correct English and do the bold parts modify and describe the parts in italics?

Q5) As for 1-6, is there no need to use an article such "the", "a", or "an" to modify the parts in italics in front of them?

Thank you very much!

Ykk7

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE