Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: some questions

  1. #1
    Anonymous Guest

    Default some questions

    1)
    Everything tasted pretty much the same.

    In this sentence, does "pretty much the same" mean "in pretty much the same way"? In other word, can you explain that "in" and "way" was omitted ? Or is "the same" a complement of the sentence ?

    2)
    Nobody believed him when he said he was innocent. Now, when he said he stole them, nobody believed him either.

    Would you tell me why "say" in the first sentence is "said" ? I think "say" should be "had said".

    And why is "steal" in the second sentence "stole" ? I think it should be "had stolen".

    3) I can not make sense of the sentence below clearly. Would you paraphrase this sentence ?

    It was too much of a coincidence to be a mere accident.

  2. #2
    RonBee's Avatar
    RonBee is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    16,571
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: some questions

    Quote Originally Posted by ai
    1)
    Everything tasted pretty much the same.

    In this sentence, does "pretty much the same" mean "in pretty much the same way"? In other word, can you explain that "in" and "way" was omitted ? Or is "the same" a complement of the sentence ?
    Without more context, I assume that "Everything tasted pretty much the same" that the taste of everything was identical. I wouldn't use "in pretty much the same way" because that says to me that "everything" is doing the tasting. However, if you leave out the "in" in that phrase you are doing fine.

    I would call "the same" a complement of the sentence in question.

    It's a pretty common English expression.

    • A: How are things?
      B: The same. It's the same today as it was yesterday.



    Quote Originally Posted by ai
    2)
    Nobody believed him when he said he was innocent. Now, when he said he stole them, nobody believed him either.

    Would you tell me why "say" in the first sentence is "said" ? I think "say" should be "had said".

    And why is "steal" in the second sentence "stole" ? I think it should be "had stolen".
    There is no reason that I can see to use past perfect there. The writer (or speaker) is commenting on something that happened in the past and was finished in the past. To use past perfect you have to establish a context for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by ai
    3) I can not make sense of the sentence below clearly. Would you paraphrase this sentence ?

    It was too much of a coincidence to be a mere accident.
    • It was too much of a coincidence to be accidental.


    Or:

    • It was so much of a coincidence that I don't believe it was a coincidence.


    Does that help?

    :)

Similar Threads

  1. A newbie with usage questions
    By Francois in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 30-Jan-2007, 10:41
  2. questions - have to/must, article, mistakes
    By Lenka in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 25-Sep-2004, 07:32
  3. questions from "Friends" script
    By welldone in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 03-Jul-2004, 19:32
  4. Answering questions
    By dduck in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-Sep-2003, 23:57

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •