|
- verbs - Lets vs. lets: which is correct? - English Language . . .
Let’s is the English cohortative word, meaning “let us” in an exhortation of the group including the speaker to do something Lets is the third person singular present tense form of the verb let meaning to permit or allow In the questioner’s examples, the sentence means to say “Product (allows permits you to) do something awesome”, so the form with lets is correct
- infinitives - Passive of verb let : with or without to - English . . .
Page 64 of the fourth edition of Practical English Usage reads Verbs which can be followed, in active structures, by object + infinitive without to, use to-infinitives in passive structures Comp
- apostrophe - Etymology of let us and lets - English Language . . .
Let's go out Let's have a party Let's see what happens Let's stand together in this emergency Let's not forget those who sacrificed their lives Questions I believe that let + us is the only instance where this type of contraction occurs
- The phrase let alone - English Language Usage Stack Exchange
I notice that "let alone" is used in sentences that have a comma The structure of the sentence is what comes before the comma is some kind of negative statement Right after the comma is "let alon
- meaning - Difference between Let, Lets and Lets? - English Language . . .
Many people use "let, let's and lets" in conversation What's the difference between them?
- Let alone phrase - English Language Usage Stack Exchange
The let alone construction has been analyzed in great and precise detail in a famous paper by Fillmore, Kay, and O'Connor: " Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone ", Language, Vol 64, No 3 (1988:501-38) EDIT: By request The two clauses have to be on a certain scale of meaning; one of the clauses must describe a situation that is less on that scale
- The passive with let - English Language Usage Stack Exchange
Let normally occurs with a clause of some sort as complement, and passive is unlikely with a clausal object: Bill wants me to come to the party would be passivized to *For me to come to the party is wanted by Bill, which is hardly an improvement So let doesn't normally passivize
- Not to Mention ≈ [Let Alone ≈ Much Less ≈ Still Less]
I find the distinction that MacMillan makes between not to mention and the supposedly synonymous let alone and still much even less useful: The phrases let alone and still much even less reinforce a negative or unlikely statement that precedes them The still much even less constructs reinforce the negativity of the preceding phrase by subtraction -- Negative statement, still much even less
|
|
|