spelling

[jack]

Are these correct:

1. Organizing the pictures suck. (this doesn't sound right? Is it suppose to be 'sucks'? Is that the way it is spelled? But the subject is plural?)
2. Organizing the pictures sucks.

3. I hate organizing the pictures, it sucks.
4. I hate organizing the pictures, it suck. ('it' is referring to pictures, so does that mean 'suck' is correct?)

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by jack

Are these correct:

1. Organizing the pictures suck. (this doesn't sound right? Is it suppose to be 'sucks'? Is that the way it is spelled? But the subject is plural?)
2. Organizing the pictures sucks.

Singular Subject + Singular Verb
It sucks.
Organizing sucks.
Organizaing the pictures sucks.

Note that, 'the pictures' functions as the object of the noun/gerund 'Organizing'. The verb 'sucks' agrees in singular number with the gerund 'Organizing'.

Erroneous
Organizing the pictures suck ~ They suck. :( It should be, It sucks. :D

Originally Posted by jack

3. I hate organizing the pictures, it sucks.
4. I hate organizing the pictures, it suck. ('it' is referring to pictures, so does that mean 'suck' is correct?)

4. is incorrect. Notice the subject "it" is singular in number:

EX: It (organizing the pictures) sucks.
EX: It sucks.
EX: Organizing the pictures sucks.

All the best, :D

[jack]

Okay, I get it now. Thanks.

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by jack

Okay, I get it now. Thanks.

You're welcome. :D

[jack]

As I was studying this again, I don't understand why this is incorrect?

1. This is corrected. (Not OK; 'corrected' doesn't work as a nominal participle). I don't understand why this is not right? Doesn't this mean that you're proofreading something and it is corrected now?

2. This was corrected. (OK; verbal participle) Why is this one okay?

Are these correct?
3. It is corrected now. (Saying it has been corrected?)
4. It is correct now. (Saying it is correct?)


1.At its worst, it can be very bad indeed – with persons unknown effectively hijacking your identity to access your existing assets and all the credit they can get from you.
That sentence was taken from here http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/cont...ome/P30111.asp

I don't understand why they didn't use 'people' instead of 'persons'?

[Tdol]

'Persons' is used in certain special contexts, such as the law.

[jack]

Originally Posted by tdol

'Persons' is used in certain special contexts, such as the law.

I still don't really understand this. What difference does it make if they used 'people'? What does 'persons' mean in that sentence?

[Tdol]

In legal language, they often use special forms and this is one example- the police will say that something was stolen by person\persons unknown, because they aren't sure if it was one or more.

[jack]

Is this incorrect? why?

1. Ironning (Why doesn't it follow this rule 'When the verb ends with 1 vowel and 1 consonant you double the last letter and then add -ing; grin-grinning. When the verb ends with 'e', you take the 'e' away and add '-ing'; shine-shining. '?)

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by jack

1. This is corrected.

FRC added something on that note--specifically, context--so please see his post. :D

At its worst, it can be very bad indeed – with persons unknown effectively hijacking your identity to access your existing assets and all the credit they can get from you.

Source

Use the plural form of person, persons, when you want to make sure that each individual in a group understands that they are individually responsible, as opposed to being responsible as a group. For example, "Persons under the age of 18 will not be served alcohol" means, each person or a person within any given group of peopleunder the age of 18 will not be served.

All the best, :D