Dear Mr. C:

You wrote:

Which among the sentences below is or are correct?

1. Marvin plays basketball well as I do.
2. Marvin plays basketball well like I do.
3. Marvin plays basketball as well as I do.

As they stand, only #3 is grammatically correct, though you do hear people say #2.

#1 would be correct with a comma after well, marking the division between the two separate clauses. That would say something different from #3.

#3 says that Marvin plays with the same ability that I play with. There is a comparison.

“Marvin plays basketball well, as I do” simply says that both Marvin and I play well, but with no comparison implied.

In standard written English, like is a preposition, not a conjunction, so #2 is nonstandard since like is followed by a clause.

I hope this helps.

Dear Dr. B:

You wrote:

Hope all ok with you. Could please write me the difference in meaning between these two following sentences:

‘rat renal proximal tubules’

and ‘renal proximal rat tubules’

OR

‘the selective enzyme receptor’
and ‘the enzyme selective receptor’

when there is no hyphen between words. Your kindly cooperation will be appreciated.

Our reply:
Generally, unless there is an understood compound word or a comma between the modifiers, the word nearest the noun modifies the noun. The word next to that modifier modifies both the words, and so on.

For example: “green truck” — “green” modifies “truck.”
“new green truck” — “new” modifies the phrase “green truck.”
“big new green truck” — “big” modifies the phrase “new green truck.”

Now I am not a medical doctor, so I am not certain but in the examples you gave, it sounds like the second example in both cases does not make sense. In the first example I think you are trying to say “renal proximal tubules from rats,” which is what the first phrase means. The second means “proximal rat tubules from kidneys.” I think kidneys have proximal tubules, not rat tubules!

Similarly “selective enzyme receptor” sounds correct. What “selective enzyme receptors” means is “receptors of enzymes that are selective.” The second means “selective receptors belonging to enzymes.” I am no physician, but I believe you mean the first.

I hope this helps, and I hope the example I gave makes this clearer.

Dear M:
You wrote:

>It says on the English Plus site that you shouldn’t say “because” after “reason.” Is this the same for “why” before “reason?”

No. That is a different case. “That” is used because the clause modifies a noun (“reason”) and it should be modified by a noun or adjective clause. “Because” introduces an adverb clause.

Dear Mr. B:
You wrote:
>Question: What do you call the noun in a prepositional phrase? If a sentence reads, “The XYZ blog has a great blog post about John Smith,” what is ‘John Smith’?
>My understanding is that ‘XYZ blog’ is the subject, and ‘blog post’ is the direct object. But ‘John Smith’ would not be the indirect object, right? If not, is there a word for such a noun in a prepositional phrase?

The noun in the prepositional phrase is the object of the preposition. In the example you gave, “John Smith” would be the object of the preposition “about.”

Prepositions got their name because they normally are in a position before a noun (a “pre” position).

Dear Mr. W:

You wrote:

>In the sentence ‘they made their way slowly…’ what is the the name of the part of speech ‘way’?

It directly follows a possessive pronoun; that gives you a good clue that it is a noun. It is a noun and the direct object of the verb “made.”

You also wrote:

>I am trying to identify and name the grammatical structure of ‘must see’, ‘must have seen’, ‘to smoke’, and ‘smoking’.

The first two are verb phrases. “Must” is an idiomatic auxiliary verb like “can,” “may,” or “shall.” Some authorities consider “see” as an infinitive or “have seen” as a perfect infinitive following “must.” That is the pattern in Latin. However, most authorities simply see them as verb phases: “Must see” in the present tense and “must have seen” in the present perfect tense.

“To smoke” is the infinitive. It can refer to the act of inhaling tobacco or other substances or it can refer to a fire or other heat source producing smoke.

“Smoking” is either a gerund or a present participle, depending on how it is used in the sentence. In the sentence “he quit smoking last month,” it is a gerund because it is acting as a noun. In the sentence “We came across a smoking campfire,” it is a participle because it is acting as an adjective. It is also part of any progressive verb phrase as in “Before he quit, he was smoking two packs of cigarettes a day.”

It sounds like you are studying basic English grammar.

Dear RL:
You wrote:

>Regarding the same issue, can I use a singular verb if I want to modify “jewellery sector”?

> The jewellery sector in Italy is one of the key manufacturing industries that HAS sustained constant growth in exports.

>Thank you again for your kind attention.

In this case the clause would be modifying the word “one” since that is the closest singular word to the clause. However, since “one” is standing in for “jewelry sector,” then the effect is the same.

>”Precious metal,” can it be plural?

>Thanks again.

If you are speaking of more than one variety–for example, silver and gold–then you would say “Precious metals.”

Dear RL:

You wrote:
>If I write:

>A series of promotional activities that RELATE/RELATES…..

>Kindly clarify.

You could use either verb depending on which word you want the adjective clause to modify.

The clause that begins “that relates” is an adjective clause. It could modify either “series” or “activities.” If you want it to modify “series,” then the verb would be “relates” since “series” is singular and “that” is the pronoun replacing “series.” However, if you want the clause to describe “activities,” then you would use the verb “relate” because “activities” is plural and the “that” would be standing for “activities.”

Generally, you would want to place the clause as close as possible to the word it modifies. That is not always possible–in this case because of the prepositional phrase “of promotional activities.” If the subject of the sentence were also plural, readers would assume that the clause modifies “activities.” But if you want the clause to modify “series,” then the verb “relates” would make it clear that the clause is describing the series, not the activities. You can make the distinction here because one noun is singular and one noun is plural.

Dear D:

You wrote:

> I believe Churchill’s correction to his sentence that ended in a
> prepostion was incorrect. “Up with” is part of the verb “put up with”.
> There is a class of verbs that are constructed of a verb and a word (in
> this case two) that is usually used as a preposition. The way to
> distinguish them is through their meaning. The term “put up with” does not
> mean “place in a higher location with” I also think the point of the rule
> is not that the object of the preposition preceeds the prepostion but that
> the prepostiton has no object. Usually when a sentence ends in a
> preposition the inferred obect is already the object of the verb. Sayin
> “with which” creates a word that can act as the object of the prepostiton.
> For example, “I like the town I come from.” Where is the object of the
> prepostiton, “from”? “Town” is the object of the verb.
> I suppose one could say, “I like the town which I came from.” This would
> still violate the “rule” but not its spirit.

The whole thing is bogus. If you check our newsletters online, you’ll see that we have received more correspondence on this “rule” than anything. The most striking thing is that no one follows it. The few nineteenth century grammar texts that mentioned it did so in the way we stated. It has been a while, but I believe Linsley was one such text.

Here are a couple of our newletters that dealt with questions people had on this:
https://www.englishplus.com/news/news0201.htm
and
https://www.englishplus.com/news/news0401.htm

> Another sentence that bothers me is, “Where is my car at?” It is redundant
> to use “where” and “at” together.
>
Yes, we mention this on our page entitled “At after Where.”
>
> A few more:
> talk to/speak with

Interesting, but probably not a big issue with most people. Most people
understand the difference between “to” and “with.”

> I wish I was/I wish I were (use of subjunctive mood)
>
We have a fairly detailed page on the Subjunctive Mood.

Thank you for your thoughts.