English - Open Mondays to Fridays?
I wonder which of these sentences is correct, or apt for notices, with regard to using the plural form to describe the days of the week:
1. We are open 8 hours a day, Mondays to Fridays.
or
2. We are open 8 hours a day, Monday to Friday.
And
1. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon(s)–Fri(s)
or
2. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon–Fri
And
1. He is required to travel from Mondays to Fridays each week.
or
2. He is required to travel from Monday to Friday each week.
– Paul Chan, Kuala Lumpur
A. You can use:
EITHER 1. We are open 8 hours a day, Mondays to Fridays.
OR 2. We are open 8 hours a day, Monday to Friday.
B. It is better to use:
2. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon–Fri
Mon(s)–Fri(s) looks odd to me. “Mon-Fri” is understood to mean from Monday to Friday every week.
C. “He is required to travel from Monday to Friday each week.” is correct, because there is only one Monday and one Friday each week.
Conditional sentences
I AM confused by the following sentences:
Second Conditional (Present unreal situation)
1. If I was not born into this world, what would I be?
2. If the computer were not invented, we would use the typewriter instead.
3. If the typewriter were not invented, we would use the pen instead.
Third Conditional (to show a not-impossible situation)
1. If the computer had not been invented, we would have had to use the typewriter instead.
2. If the typewriter had not been invented, we would have had to use the pen instead.
3. If I had not been born into the world, I would probably have been an angel in heaven.
I would be grateful if you could tell me whether the above sentences have or have not been suitably used based on the contexts and situations.
– yokoegu
In the contexts and situations of your three sentences, you should use the Third Conditional which, in positive sentences, expresses what might have been (but wasn’t).
In negative sentences such as yours, the Third Conditional expresses what might not have been (but was).
In each of these sentences, the conditional clause should use a past perfect negative verb, and the main clause a “would have” + “past participle of main verb”.
The Second Conditional expresses unreal, impossible or unlikely situations, and uses a verb in the simple past tense in the conditional clause and a “would” + “base form of main verb” in the main clause. It doesn’t refer to the past. Here are some examples:
If I had wings, I would fly.
If he was very rich, he would travel all over the world.
The pineapple is a local fruit
1. FOR a shoal of fish, can “The fish is in the water” be accepted? Or is only “The fish are in the water” correct?
2. Can these sentences be accepted?
“The pineapple is local.”
(Instead of “The pineapple is a local fruit.”)
“She waters plants every day.”
(Instead of “She waters the plants every day.”)
– Vanitha, Penang
1. “A shoal of fish” means a large number of fish swimming together. So, although the plural form of “fish” is usually the same as the singular form, when you use “fish” as a plural noun, you need to use a plural verb after it. Hence, only “The fish are in the water” is correct when you are talking about a shoal of fish.
2. a) The adjective “local” usually comes before a noun. So, “The pineapple is local.” sounds rather odd and incomplete. “The pineapple is a local fruit.” sounds better and is more specific.
b) There is a difference in meaning between “She waters plants every day.” and “She waters the plants every day.”
The first sentence does not specify which plants she waters: she could be watering plants in several gardens, for example, as a part-time job. The second sentence refers to specific plants that must have been mentioned in a previous sentence. For instance, we could say: “My mother looks after her garden very well. She waters the plants every day.”
If you want to use “the” without any prior reference to specific plants, the reference can be made in the sentence itself, e.g. “She waters the plants in her garden every day.”
When do we use ‘on top of’?
IN my Year 4 grandson’s first term English Test paper, this was a question posed:
Based on the picture, write one sentence, use both the words.
1. Standing; stool
2. Sister; Piano
The sentence constructed in (1) by the student was:
“He is standing on top of the stool.”
The teacher’s comment when marking the sentence as wrong was:
“Correct construction — He is standing on the stool.”
In the construction of a sentence, is there any criterion related to height to allow the use of “ON TOP OF”?
In (2), the sentence constructed by the student was:
“My sister likes to play piano in the evening.”
The teacher’s comment when marking the sentence as wrong was:
“Correct construction — My sister likes to play the piano in the evening.”
Question: When should the definite article “the” be used?
According to the feedback from the school, the UPSR Exam format apparently requires that the definite article THE be used in front of a musical instrument mentioned in a sentence. I wonder how far that is true.
In conclusion, we believe that in English, there are many TRICKY constructions and exceptions to the rule. Do you agree?
– Yee T.S.
1) There is nothing wrong in writing “He is standing on top of the stool.” It means the same thing as “He is standing on the stool.”
The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2005) gives the meaning of “on top of something/somebody” as “on, over or covering something/somebody”.
The online Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, in giving an example of the use of the noun “top” has the following sentence: “There was a pile of books on top of (= on) the table.”
I also found a UK antique dealer’s site, with a picture of one of the sold items, which is described as:
“A delightful bronze figure of a young girl standing on top of a stool ...”
(http://www.richard gardnerantiques.co.uk/pages/large/large1547.html)
As you can see from the picture, the stool there is not much taller than the stool in the test paper. This goes to show that something need not be of a certain height before we can be said to stand “on top of” it. Even a low stool will do.
Of course, we don’t say we are standing on top of something level, like a carpet as “standing on top of a carpet”, although we can say:
“A thin piece of oil cloth is laid on top of the carpet ...”
(http://my.telegraph.co.uk/jackdaw/blog/2007/09/14/stagecraft_part_3_the_theatrical_tricks)
“On top of” here means “over” as given in the OALD’s second meaning above.
2) In this case, the teacher is right on what should be the correct answer, i.e. “My sister likes to play the piano in the evening.”
We usually put “the” before a musical instrument when talking “about musical instruments in general or about playing musical instruments” (Michael Swan, Practical English Usage, 2005, p.64).
However, the writer goes on to say that “the” is “often dropped when talking about jazz or pop and sometimes ... classical music.” We can see this in two examples given by OALD after the definition of the word “guitar”;
“Do you play the guitar?” and “She plays guitar in a band.”
I agree with you that “in English, there are many TRICKY constructions and exceptions to the rule”. This is true in many other languages as well.
- THE STAR
1. We are open 8 hours a day, Mondays to Fridays.
or
2. We are open 8 hours a day, Monday to Friday.
And
1. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon(s)–Fri(s)
or
2. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon–Fri
And
1. He is required to travel from Mondays to Fridays each week.
or
2. He is required to travel from Monday to Friday each week.
– Paul Chan, Kuala Lumpur
A. You can use:
EITHER 1. We are open 8 hours a day, Mondays to Fridays.
OR 2. We are open 8 hours a day, Monday to Friday.
B. It is better to use:
2. Open 8 hrs a day: Mon–Fri
Mon(s)–Fri(s) looks odd to me. “Mon-Fri” is understood to mean from Monday to Friday every week.
C. “He is required to travel from Monday to Friday each week.” is correct, because there is only one Monday and one Friday each week.
Conditional sentences
I AM confused by the following sentences:
Second Conditional (Present unreal situation)
1. If I was not born into this world, what would I be?
2. If the computer were not invented, we would use the typewriter instead.
3. If the typewriter were not invented, we would use the pen instead.
Third Conditional (to show a not-impossible situation)
1. If the computer had not been invented, we would have had to use the typewriter instead.
2. If the typewriter had not been invented, we would have had to use the pen instead.
3. If I had not been born into the world, I would probably have been an angel in heaven.
I would be grateful if you could tell me whether the above sentences have or have not been suitably used based on the contexts and situations.
– yokoegu
In the contexts and situations of your three sentences, you should use the Third Conditional which, in positive sentences, expresses what might have been (but wasn’t).
In negative sentences such as yours, the Third Conditional expresses what might not have been (but was).
In each of these sentences, the conditional clause should use a past perfect negative verb, and the main clause a “would have” + “past participle of main verb”.
The Second Conditional expresses unreal, impossible or unlikely situations, and uses a verb in the simple past tense in the conditional clause and a “would” + “base form of main verb” in the main clause. It doesn’t refer to the past. Here are some examples:
If I had wings, I would fly.
If he was very rich, he would travel all over the world.
The pineapple is a local fruit
1. FOR a shoal of fish, can “The fish is in the water” be accepted? Or is only “The fish are in the water” correct?
2. Can these sentences be accepted?
“The pineapple is local.”
(Instead of “The pineapple is a local fruit.”)
“She waters plants every day.”
(Instead of “She waters the plants every day.”)
– Vanitha, Penang
1. “A shoal of fish” means a large number of fish swimming together. So, although the plural form of “fish” is usually the same as the singular form, when you use “fish” as a plural noun, you need to use a plural verb after it. Hence, only “The fish are in the water” is correct when you are talking about a shoal of fish.
2. a) The adjective “local” usually comes before a noun. So, “The pineapple is local.” sounds rather odd and incomplete. “The pineapple is a local fruit.” sounds better and is more specific.
b) There is a difference in meaning between “She waters plants every day.” and “She waters the plants every day.”
The first sentence does not specify which plants she waters: she could be watering plants in several gardens, for example, as a part-time job. The second sentence refers to specific plants that must have been mentioned in a previous sentence. For instance, we could say: “My mother looks after her garden very well. She waters the plants every day.”
If you want to use “the” without any prior reference to specific plants, the reference can be made in the sentence itself, e.g. “She waters the plants in her garden every day.”
When do we use ‘on top of’?
IN my Year 4 grandson’s first term English Test paper, this was a question posed:
Based on the picture, write one sentence, use both the words.
1. Standing; stool
2. Sister; Piano
The sentence constructed in (1) by the student was:
“He is standing on top of the stool.”
The teacher’s comment when marking the sentence as wrong was:
“Correct construction — He is standing on the stool.”
In the construction of a sentence, is there any criterion related to height to allow the use of “ON TOP OF”?
In (2), the sentence constructed by the student was:
“My sister likes to play piano in the evening.”
The teacher’s comment when marking the sentence as wrong was:
“Correct construction — My sister likes to play the piano in the evening.”
Question: When should the definite article “the” be used?
According to the feedback from the school, the UPSR Exam format apparently requires that the definite article THE be used in front of a musical instrument mentioned in a sentence. I wonder how far that is true.
In conclusion, we believe that in English, there are many TRICKY constructions and exceptions to the rule. Do you agree?
– Yee T.S.
1) There is nothing wrong in writing “He is standing on top of the stool.” It means the same thing as “He is standing on the stool.”
The Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (2005) gives the meaning of “on top of something/somebody” as “on, over or covering something/somebody”.
The online Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, in giving an example of the use of the noun “top” has the following sentence: “There was a pile of books on top of (= on) the table.”
I also found a UK antique dealer’s site, with a picture of one of the sold items, which is described as:
“A delightful bronze figure of a young girl standing on top of a stool ...”
(http://www.richard gardnerantiques.co.uk/pages/large/large1547.html)
As you can see from the picture, the stool there is not much taller than the stool in the test paper. This goes to show that something need not be of a certain height before we can be said to stand “on top of” it. Even a low stool will do.
Of course, we don’t say we are standing on top of something level, like a carpet as “standing on top of a carpet”, although we can say:
“A thin piece of oil cloth is laid on top of the carpet ...”
(http://my.telegraph.co.uk/jackdaw/blog/2007/09/14/stagecraft_part_3_the_theatrical_tricks)
“On top of” here means “over” as given in the OALD’s second meaning above.
2) In this case, the teacher is right on what should be the correct answer, i.e. “My sister likes to play the piano in the evening.”
We usually put “the” before a musical instrument when talking “about musical instruments in general or about playing musical instruments” (Michael Swan, Practical English Usage, 2005, p.64).
However, the writer goes on to say that “the” is “often dropped when talking about jazz or pop and sometimes ... classical music.” We can see this in two examples given by OALD after the definition of the word “guitar”;
“Do you play the guitar?” and “She plays guitar in a band.”
I agree with you that “in English, there are many TRICKY constructions and exceptions to the rule”. This is true in many other languages as well.
- THE STAR
MOHD ADHA MOHD ZAIN (ADHA ZAIN)
Blogger Informasi
