According to what I have been taught, the act "borrow" can not last. It seems to happen in a flash. So the "grammar" I've learnt told me: you can not conncet such words like "borrow" with a period of time. Another example is: I can not say "he married for six years". But, just now I looked it up in the dictionary and found the verb "borrow" can last. That is my long-term misunderstanding!
I understand what you mean. Yes, it only takes a second to borrow something, but we say, "Can I borrow it for 2 weeks" meaning "Can I borrow it now and keep it for two 2 weeks". The same for renting, or hiring. You hire something for 2 weeks, but hiring it only takes a few minutes. This is a common concept. If you buy an "entrance ticket" to a movie, this allows you not only to enter the theatre, but to stay there while the movie is playing. Hence, borrowing something allows you to keep it for the length of time you've borrowed it for.
But for the second one, I've been told that "what is the matter" should be treated differently when changed into indirect speech; that is, the order of the words is not changed. You should still say: I ask him what is the matter.
No. Some people might phrase it this way, but just as many would say it the other way.
And another similar one is the sentence "what is wrong". So did I get it wrong for a long time, too? (can "get" last? Is this sentence wrong in the same way?)
Do there exist such questioning sentences in English that when put into a bigger sentence as a clause, the order of words remains the same?
