These statements are ok:   "I looked George up." "I looked up George." "I looked him up."   But this is not ok: "I looked up him."  In this case, it's not possible to substitute the pronoun "him" for "George". What rule prohibits this substitution?
77948
Both seem to be in common usage, but is there a nuanced difference about when one is more appropriate than the other? Thanks.
89355
I've been confused about this as long as I can remember. Should it be:     One should do ones duty.   or     One should do one's duty.   I'm guessing it should be the latter. But that doesn't sit well with the possessive pronoun 'its'. For example:     It is its own purpose.   vs.     It is it's own purpose.   Here, the former seems clearly correct.
92039
My question is as the title says: Is it allowed for a pronoun and its referent to have different plurality? A specific example I am considering is a sentence like this:     I love this cookie so much that I bought dozens of them and distributed them to my friends.   I am curious whether this kind of sentence is grammatically correct or not.
113442
can i use it for animals in the following sentece?  1- I have a dog named Don. It is a very good dog.  I know most people would use "he" instead of "it" in the following context and my grammar book says when we want to personified an animal we can use "he" or "they". But my question is, if I used "it" in the above, would that be grammatical?
13666
What is the grammar behind the construction "I think it strange/necessary that ...", and when can and cannot this apparent omission of the copula be used? Do we always need the "that" clause?  Also, this seems to be only allowed when the object is a pronoun (it in the above example). That is, we don't say "I think this method strange", correct?
53924
I have come across the phrases like "to which","for which", "by which", "on which" and so on(using a preposition with a relative pronoun).   e.g. The chair on which the body was found..  Could someone please explain if there's a particular rule to be followed when building/using them?   Can I use any preposition before 'which'?  What if I say "The chair which the body was found on"? How would I decide which preposition to be put? Can I use other relative pronouns too?  Thanks in advance.
92488
When you uncontract doesn't in "Why doesn't it work?" the not moves to "Why does it not work?"  This confuses me even more when I use a longer phrase instead of the pronoun it like below:     Why doesn't this simple code example work?   Why does the word order change when we use a contraction?
5858
I know that one can use "they" / "them" / "their" in place of "he" / "him" / "his" or "she" / "her" / "hers" when the subject's / direct object's gender is not known; for instance, just looking at the default user's about me section on Stack Exchange sites:     Apparently, this user prefers to keep an air of mystery about them   My question is what happens when someone wants to reference the subject using a pronoun instead.  Should the verb be conjugated accordingly to the pronoun? E.g.:     Apparently, they prefer to keep an air of mystery about them   Or should the conjugation be retained? E.g.:     Apparently, they prefers to keep an air of mystery about them   The former looks unclear because it wouldn't allow the reader / listener to understand if the writer / speaker is talking about a single person or about a group of people, however the latter sounds very weird, at least just to the non-native speaker which I am.
16112
You're too clever a man to imagine this.   The above sentence was , a man of excellent rhetorical skills.   Since he said it, I doubt it's wrong, grammatically. But, I wonder if there is an explanation for this. Because adjectives always come after the article not before it. e.g. You're a clever man.   How could this be, grammatically?
7603
I cannot make much sense of one in the following passage from :  Now the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline one for the present, hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  If  is a noun in this passage, then  must serve here as a pronoun. If so, isn't the sentence lacking in punctuation? Rewriting would make it less ambiguous:  Now the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline, one for the present hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  Furthermore, I can't help thinking that one is not needed here at all:  Now, the various species of whales need some sort of popular comprehensive classification, if only an easy outline for the present, hereafter to be filled in all its departments by subsequent laborers.  If Melville correctly worded this sentence, what is the function of one in it? What are your thoughts on my modifications?
91938
If the context is crystal clear and, as such, allows no risk of misunderstanding or ambiguity whatsoever, unlike "Paul jumps into the lake (= Paul jumps into the lake from a certain point)" vs. "Paul jumps in the lake (= Paul is in the lake and jumps out)", is it grammatically acceptable in AmE to substitute "in" and "on" for "into" and "onto" to indicate movement or the idea of movement, for all but the most formal prose?  E.g.  Should we go in the pool first, or should we shower first?   Let's get on the bus before the good seats are taken.   Let me translate this in the language of non-BS...
29662
I'm confused about 'want you to do (something)' and 'want you do (something)'.  Example:      "I want you to eat fish" instead of "I want you eat fish" or "I want that you eat fish".    Can anyone explain what is the grammar rule for this?
78315
I've seen a lot of times the pronoun them used like an article. For example, in the title of the Delta Rhythm Boys Them bones, or in the first sentence of "Money for nothing":     Now look at them yo-yo's, that's the way you do it.   I know that it's not "proper English" (i.e., not something you'll use in a serious writing), but I'd like to know when it's commonly used, and why. Is there any difference between using it and using the?
17763
Is there a rule beyond the common "no the with proper nouns and names" for the following problem?     I saw the Empire State Building.      We went to the White House.      We saw the Golden Gate Bridge.   but     I went to Death Valley National Park.      I crossed Brooklyn Bridge.
91962
According to      there         adverb          in or at that place (opposed to here ):      She is there now.         pronoun          (used to introduce a sentence or clause in which the verb comes before its subject or has no complement):      There is no hope.   Then, what element is there in:     There is the man.   I'm confused because "There is the man" is an adverb inversion, in which there is an adverb and "the man is" is inverted. But according to the definition above, there suddenly becomes a pronoun.
39463
I have a question about the words order and their effect on the meaning of a sentence when it comes to use the verbs "replace" and "substitute"!  As far as I know, "to replace someone / something with someone / something else" means "to substitute someone / something for someone / something else".  Additionally, as far as I am concerned, if you are replacing A with B, then you are substituting B for A.  But problem is that if changing the words' places in each structure makes any difference in meaning?  For instance, does it make any difference if I say:         Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace me with Sam Or substitute Sam for me.           Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace Sam with me Or substitute me for Sam.       Let me simplify it! The inly thing that is important in the meaning of the two is that:  (Replace X with Y = Substitute Y for X)  But I need to know if replacing X and Y has a specific connotation in English? For example, in:      1.a. They  are going to replace Sam with me.    1.b. They  are going to substitute me for Sam.     ..........................      2.a. They  are going to replace me with Sam.    2.b. They  are going to substitute Sam for me.     I was wondering which set implies that I was the first employee and Sam is taking my place?  Also which set implies that I as a new employee am taking Sam's place?  I hope I could make myself understood.   Thank you.
60063
Should the following say whoever or whomever. And why?      Each of us is free to pretend to be whoever/whomever we wish to be.   This sentence needs an object, right?