adding -s

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by jack

I still don't really get part:

1. That RIM sells to companies and telecommunications providers. (After 'to' don't you have to use the base word? And I still don't understand how there can be two plural words next to each other 'telecommunications providers'. Thanks.)

'to' is short for towards (meaning: in the direction of). It's a preposition, not an infinitive marker.

Sells bread to us.
Sells us bread.

The verb sells is a double object verb. It takes two objects: a direct object and an indirect object.

They sell software to companies and (to) providers.

They sell software to internet companies and (to) telecommunications providers.


'telecommunications' is a noun, and nouns can function as adjectives.
What kind of providers? Telecommunications providers. Providers who deal in telecommunications.

[jack]

'telecommunications' is a noun, and nouns can function as adjectives.
What kind of providers? Telecommunications providers. Providers who deal in telecommunications.

What about this?
What kind of cars? Fasts cars. <--this is wrong? and this is right 'telecommunications providers'? I still don't really understand why it isn't 'telecommunication providers' without the -s. Why do I need to have a 's' there?

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by jack

What about this?
What kind of cars? Fasts cars. <--this is wrong? and this is right 'telecommunications providers'? I still don't really understand why it isn't 'telecommunication providers' without the -s. Why do I need to have a 's' there?

fast is an adjective in form and function, whereas the plural noun "telecommunications" is a noun in form that can function as an adjective:

telecommunications company ( a company that deals with more than one kind of telecommunication (e.g., TV, Radio, Cell, Internet, etc.)

[jack]

Thanks. It makes sense now. Yay.

[Casiopea]

Yeah! Great.

[jack]

What do these mean?
3. Generation after generation
4. Generations after generations.
5. Generation after generations.
6. Generations after generation.

3. 'Generation after generation' This is the stock phrase, which means 'down through (evolutionary) time, from parent to offspring to parent to offspring and so on and on''. The other three phrases you give are meaningless, artificially-generated, permutations of this one.

What do these mean?
1. You can use this drive from computer to compputer.
So these ones have no meaning?
2. You can use this drive from computers to compputers.
3. You can use this drive from computer to compputers.
4. You can use this drive from computers to compputer.

What do these mean?
5. So these ones have no meaning? (I am asking for the meaning for five sentences, does it make sense to use 'meaning?)
6. So these ones have no meanings? (More then one meaning?)
7. So this one have no meaning?
8. So this one have no meanings?

[Mister Micawber]

Hi Jack.

(1) is the stock phrase: no article, singular noun. 'Driven from pillar to post by his questions', 'we travelled coast to coast', 'traditions run from father to son.' I could make sentences with (2) - (4) if I added some determiners and put them in context (e.g. 'you can use this drive from this computer to your computers') but they are not the stock expression which we are talking about.


[And Jack, if you are going to post such series of very similar sentences, please check your typos/grammar carefully, because I sometimes don't know what you are asking about precisely: sentences (7) and (8) have the wrong verb form, so of course they are not correct.]

The phrase 'these ones' is substandard in AmE, and should be replaced by 'these' only, in (5) and (6); otherwise, all four forms (5) - (8) are possible, depending on how many sentences the writer is referring to, and how many potential meanings the writer may be considering.

[jack]

sentences (7) and (8) have the wrong verb form, so of course they are not correct.]

Thanks for the heads up.

What do these mean?
1. This fan has different kinds of failures?
2. This fan has different kinds of failure?

3. This fan has different kind of failures? (Is this wrong? Is it because 'different' means more than one? So 'kind' needs to be 'kinds'?)

[Mister Micawber]

In (1) 'failure' is countable; in (2) it is uncountable. Many nouns have both forms. Both (1) and (2) indicate that the fan can break in several ways.

(3) is incorrect but you have two options:

(3a) This fan has a different kind of failure.
(3b) This fan has different kinds of failures.