Websites which

[MikeNewYork]

Re: Grammar

Matthew, in post 9 of the thread that you linked, I proposed the following structure to solve the logic problem: On the door they balanced a bucket which would fall on my head when I came in. Problem solved. The person is now safe from the door.

 

[Matthew Wai]

Re: Grammar

'They removed the bucket on the door, which had not fallen on anyone's head.'
Is there a logic problem above?

I proposed the following structure to solve the logic problem

You can't possibly solve any logic problems for me, so I have to learn how to solve them myself.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Re: Grammar

I'll leave you to it then.

 

[Matthew Wai]

Re: Grammar

But you firstly have to tell me whether there is a logic problem below, and I will try to fix it if there is.
'They removed the bucket on the door, which had not fallen on anyone's head.'

 

[emsr2d2]

Re: Grammar

If I don't think about it using common sense, that suggests that the door had not yet fallen on anyone's head. Common sense and logic tell me it's the bucket that hasn't yet fallen on anyone's head.

 

[mawes12]

Re: Grammar

In my mind that sentence is saying they removed the bucket hasn't fallen on anyone's head.

Y'all know I'm not a teacher.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Re: Grammar

Mawes12, your senetence makes no sense.

 

[mawes12]

Re: Grammar

Oh, I forgot to put "bucket" probably because I'm writing in my phone. Thanks for that. Does it make sense now?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Re: Grammar

It is still not correct.

 

[Matthew Wai]

Re: Grammar

Is the following correct?

In my mind that sentence is saying they removed the bucket, which hadn't [STRIKE]hasn't[/STRIKE] fallen on anyone's head.

Not a teacher.

 

[Matthew Wai]

Re: Grammar

1. I have read the book on the table, which was printed in China.
2. I have read the book on the table, which was made in China.
3. I have read the book on the table, which was bought in China.

#3 is confusing; #1 and #2 are okay. Am I right?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Re: Grammar

Yes, 3 is ambiguous, but I would attach the relative clause to table. This is what I was trying to tell you about logic.

1. Tables are not printed.
2. Books are not made.
3. Both the book and the table could have been bought in China.