|
- Why . . . ? vs. Why is it that . . . ? - English Language Usage Stack . . .
I don't know why, but it seems to me that Bob would sound a bit strange if he said, "Why is it that you have to get going?" in that situation
- Where does the use of why as an interjection come from?
"why" can be compared to an old Latin form qui, an ablative form, meaning how Today "why" is used as a question word to ask the reason or purpose of something
- Contextual difference between That is why vs Which is why?
Thus we say: You never know, which is why but You never know That is why And goes on to explain: There is a subtle but important difference between the use of that and which in a sentence, and it has to do primarily with relevance Grammarians often use the terms "restrictive" and "non-restrictive" when it comes to relative clauses
- grammaticality - Is starting your sentence with “Which is why . . .
Is starting your sentence with “Which is why ” grammatically correct? …our brain is still busy processing all the information coming from the phones Which is why it is impossible to actually rest
- Is For why improper English? - English Language Usage Stack Exchange
For why' can be idiomatic in certain contexts, but it sounds rather old-fashioned Googling 'for why' (in quotes) I discovered that there was a single word 'forwhy' in Middle English
- Do you need the “why” in “Thats the reason why”? [duplicate]
Relative why can be freely substituted with that, like any restrictive relative marker I e, substituting that for why in the sentences above produces exactly the same pattern of grammaticality and ungrammaticality: the reason that he did it * the cause that he did it * the intention that he did it * the effect that he did it * the thing that
- grammaticality - Is it incorrect to say, Why cannot. . . . ? - English . . .
Since we can say "Why can we grow taller?", "Why cannot we grow taller?" is a logical and properly written negative We don't say "Why we can grow taller?" so the construct should not be "Why we cannot grow taller?" The reason is that auxiliaries should come before the subject to make an interrogative
- “John Doe”, “Jane Doe” - Why are they used many times?
There is no recorded reason why Doe, except there was, and is, a range of others like Roe So it may have been a set of names that all rhymed and that law students could remember Or it could be that they were formed from a mnemonic, like the english pronouciation of a prayer or scripture in Latin Greek
|
|
|