How happy Harry was having seen Toby's house!   I don't know whether this sentence is grammatically correct or not! In my opinion, the part "having seen Toby's house" is used as a supporting idea, which is similar to this: "Keeping these ideas in mind, we compiled this book for young readers."   Please help me!  My question is a different problem, I just don't understand the role of "having seen Toby's house"part, and wonder if it's okay to combine with "how happy harry was".
123061
I am a chinese student and one of my friend, a chinese, wrote sentences like this:  Just a little above me, he was fighting with all his might.  On the summit of the mountain, he cried with joy.  He was pretty certain that these sentences were correct but I am not so sure. I've heard sentences like His eyes bright, he talked vigorously or Her coat barely on her shoulder, she dashed out of her house, but I have never seen sentences like the ones my friend wrote, the ones with no subject in the front. Can anyone tell me the name of the sentences my friend wrote? And if possible, can you also tell me if the name of the sentences I wrote is verbless clause?  Thanks.
109675
I encountered this sentence when I was learning another language. I have never used such a sentence in English nor seen one, but it seems it exists.  What idea does this sentence trying to convey? What time should we relate to?
89112
As always, while reading through I found a sentence whose structure confused me.  What I want to know is whether the first sentence is the inversion form of the second sentence.      1. If the reason was to avoid bad publicity should his error be discovered, then . . .      2. If the reason was his error be discovered to avoid bad publicity, then . . .   If not, how should I interpret the first sentence?  Thanks.
108557
Which would be correct?        The fridge, the shelves, the walls, the floor, and John himself, were all covered in foam.   The fridge, shelves, walls, floor, and John himself, were all covered in foam.      The the can be applied to all the nouns, so is there a need to repeat it?
54263
There is a place in Bram Stoker’s Dracula where I can’t quite parse the grammar:     8 May. — I began to fear as I wrote in this book that I was getting too   diffuse. But now I am glad that I went into detail from the first, for   there is something so strange about this place and all in it that I cannot   but feel uneasy. I wish I were safe out of it, or that I had never come. It   may be that this strange night existence is telling on me, but would that   that were all!   I understand the meaning of the text in bold (it’s equivalent to if only that was all!), but I don’t understand the grammar being used. What kind of construct is this?
5226
"For someone used to the tiny creatures we get in England it was something of a shock."  I think, in this sentence, relative pronouns before some words have been omitted. I know rules of omitting relative pronouns, but in this case I have failed to understand before which words relative pronouns can be placed to understand the sentence perfectly, which has been stated above. Please, explain the rules of omitting relative pronouns with the help of the sentence stated above, so that I can be able to understand this type of sentences easily. You can also use other sentences to explain this fact clearly.  Thanks to everyone.
7481
Is this the proper way to use two possessive nouns in a row?     I am going over to Lauren's parents' house this evening.   or     The store's manager's niece was quite attractive.   What about three?*     The United States Army's general's wife's dog is on the lamb, somebody stop it.   *Three seems both unrealistic, and in the specific example I used you could make a case for adding a fourth United State's Army's but I think that seems even more unrealistic.  Additionally, I would never write this in any sort of setting other than the purpose of knowing what the rules are.  Thanks in advance, I apologize in advance if this is duplicate
67016
I desire he visit us more often.     This is correct, right?     I hope he visit us more often.     Why is this incorrect? Why should I use “visits” instead?
92336
Over on another network site, a helpful user corrected the grammar of .  The answer now says     I believe it's valid.   where I originally wrote     I believe it valid.   Is the original sentence gramamatically (or at least idiomatically) correct or do I absolutely need a form of 'to be' here? (What's more, is 'to be' a copula or an auxiliary verb if used like this?)  I am quite certain that I have seen sentences like the original one in the past, but I am uncertain where. Given that I am frequently exposed to the somewhat made-up English of authors in the fields of sci-fi and fantasy, I might have fallen into a trap here.  Edit: I don't doubt that the correction is valid and enhances readability.
92816
If I had had money, I would have bought this car.   My book says that in place of "had had", only "had" should be there. But I am confused about it, please help.
63447
I've watched 10 movies until now. He should have been here by now  I think in the first sentence, "by" doesn't work and using it will not be idiomatic. This applies to the using "until" in later sentence too. For me using "until" will not be be a correct usage. Instead the "until" in the first sentence and "by" in the second sentence fit the best. Am I right?
33633
I wonder what the reason is to say These cakes sell well instead of These cakes are being sold well.   I understand that it’s shorter but it doesn’t work with any verb, does it? For example, The house is being built can’t be substituted by The house is building.  So, what justifies and makes it acceptable to compose such a sentence which we can see in the example with the verb sell? Does it have something to do with the verb used or something else? If so, are there many verbs which can be used that way?
95843
Question: Is the first one redundant and proper, or is it redundant and not necessarily correct?  (1) He is a friend of Doug's. (2) He is a friend of Doug.
43530
Which one of the following is the correct one?   I should have seen it glow. I should have seen it glowing.   Or are both correct? Would you parse them please?
121614
Which one is correct or are both correct?     The boy's name is nice.   The name of the boy is nice.     I'm really confused these two sentences?  Which one is more suitable?
112676
That looks an interesting book. ()   ‘Look’ can take an NP for its complement by OALD. Now what I’m wondering about is if a person/people could be a subject in the structure, for instance, “They look good guys.” If we can’t, does it have to be “They look like good guys”?
78335
I hear and read them all the time. I mean stuff like:      You're just going to stay here?   Instead of:      Are you just going to stay here?    Then I write like this out of habit and get called out on my grammar issues by people who speak English much worse than I do. That's kinda embarrassing. So, could someone please explain to me whether it's correct or not? Are they acceptable at all, and if so, in which situations?      So, what? You're gonna kill me now?