I heard a person say " there is no room on the bus ". It for some reason sounded incorrect. However the most basic argument that we hear is that if it is a public transport, we use "on" but buses also have gates that get closed.  So Can it be " There is no room in the bus"  Advise please ?
89607
This is sort of a follow up to my question .  I was told a while ago that the reason why we use "on the bus" instead of "in the bus" is because back in the day buses were open, that is, they didn't have a roof.   Is this story correct or is there another reason why the correct expression is "on the bus", in spite of the fact that when one gets on the bus, he is actually inside the bus?
68254
I'm sorry for too many items below. I'm really confused. The question is really about whether to use "a", "the" or nothing in front of "news" and "television".        A small crowd is keenly watching the news on television.   A small crowd is keenly watching a news on television.   A small crowd is keenly watching news on television.   A small crowd is keenly watching the news on a television.   A small crowd is keenly watching a news on a television.   A small crowd is keenly watching news on a television.   A small crowd is keenly watching the news on the television.   A small crowd is keenly watching a news on the television.   A small crowd is keenly watching news on the television.
99059
I just came across this weird use of &quot;need not&quot; on :  Madam/sir, My daughter is stuck in Uk . She has lost her  . She is difficult to return back India home [sic]. Please help  In response,  says:  She need not worry. She should stay where she is. Just tell her to keep herself safe. Please delete your tweet.  Shouldn't it be &quot;she doesn't need to worry&quot; or &quot;she needs to not worry&quot; given that the subject is &quot;she&quot; (singular)? Or is this some kind of grammatical construction I don't know? I believe who wrote it was a native speaker of English and they might be correct. Can someone explain this please?
98496
First of all, English is not my first language. I have a question, maybe a basic one, about this phrase:     The situation highlights the mismatch between some areas of training and available jobs to/for them.   Should it be "available jobs to them" or "available jobs for them"?  Sorry if the question is really basic.
40223
I took an English assessment test online and this was my answer:     Someone suggested to go for a walk.   My answer was wrong and this was the correct sentence:     Someone suggested going for a walk.   Can someone please explain why my answer was wrong?
47585
How can I explain to people that the phrase off of is grammatically incorrect?  I‘ve heard this phrase used a lot, especially by Americans (though they aren't the only ones).    In my understanding, off of should usually be replaced by off, as in,     I took the book off the shelf   as opposed to     I took the book off of the shelf   Am I wrong?  Or is there perhaps some simple way I can explain this to most people?
104557
what is difference between the two following sentences? And which one is grammatical?  1- If there is a car in the garden, it will be towed away.  2- If there is any  car in the garden, it will be towed away.  Please note that I am making a general statement and thinking of just one car.
80711
Have a seat, guys   I think "have a seat" is a fixed phrase that does not change whether you address someone or a group of people.  Is that correct?  If you have more to add to the post, please do so as I would love to know more.
117232
says     "IN" tells us the noun is in an enclosed space (surround or closed   off on all sides). Basically, when something is inside something.      "AT" tells us that the following noun is located at a specific   point or location. It shows an exact position.      "ON" tells us that the following noun is located on a surface. Use on when   one thing is attached to or touching something.   But, what about:  "I am in the street" (so, the street is considered as an enclosed space, maybe, the sentence would mean I am in the middle of the street, not on a pavement)? or   "I am on the street" (so, the street is considered as a surface, the sentence would mean I am standing on it, not under the ground)?  What are the differences?
64421
I’ve made another mistake in a modals test, in the can/could segment.  The following exchange was presented:     Where’s my bag? Have you seen it? – No, but it _ be in the car.   I decided that both ‘can’ and ‘could’ are appropriate in the underscored position.  The key contained only ‘could’. I’m curious why ‘can’ here is wrong:     Where’s my bag? Have you seen it? – No, but it *can be in the car.   In the Russian language, we use only the present-tense form of ‘can’ in such hypothetical answers: the past of 'can' would sound literal and ridiculous; so one may tend to carbon-copy the 'can' construction into English, failing to notice the difference in sense.   I’ve consulted a textbook and it says that ‘can’ tends to be used to convey a more general meaning. An example is given:     The weather can change very quickly in the mountains. (in general)      The weather is nice now, but it could change. (the weather now, not   in general).   Is it in the same vein with the car in the example? Does “It can be in the car” sound too general while “It could be in the car” zeroes in on the immediate situation?   Would the sentence with ‘can’ come out too haughty in the context, that is, a person turns for advice concerning situation at hand, and gets a generic sentence, almost telling him “well, your bag, speaking generally, can fit in the car, go guess the rest of it”?
67465
In English, the number 0 is treated as plural. It is then:   0 seconds 1 second    1.2 seconds   2 seconds     Shouldn't it be "nobody want to go there," instead of "nobody wants to go there"?  I also saw in TOEFL that "any __" should be used with a singular.  But I see it very common that it is a plural also.  Why is that?  (updated: example, "we don't have any apples any more" vs "If you get any apple, please let me know.")
100863
Is one of these correct two versions and the other incorrect, or are they both correct?   Those on the bottom had neither the ability nor the opportunity to get to the top. Those on the bottom did not have the ability nor the opportunity to get to the top.   Are they both grammatically correct, or can you never use nor without having neither next to it?  Is “not this nor that” a grammatical construction in English, or must it only ever be “neither this nor that” or else “not this or that”?   When can you use nor?
99689
After reading , I would refrain from asking this question, but the husband of a colleague of mine (English professor, native speaker of British English) stated against it, so I am looking for further enlightenment.  He advocates some should be solely used to refer to plural forms. Thus,     some non-existent towns   is perfectly correct, but     some non-existent town   should be replaced by      a non-existent town   Is that true?
69592
Being a non native speaker of English, this type of sentence always bites me:     It was a pleasant four hours journey from Nashik to Pune.   Should it be hour or hours?
50495
I understand inversion but I have a difficulty when it comes down to "there."  A: Under the window there stood a vase. B: Under the window stood a vase.  Here my teacher said that option B is correct.  C: Under the window there was a vase. D: Under the window was a vase.  And here he said that option A is correct.  Could someone explain why I can't say option D?
33103
A lady (of West Indian ancestry) said at a Church meeting this weekend: "He picked me at the station." Obviously, she meant what I would mean by saying: "He picked me up at the station," which would not be the smutty interpretation. I think I have heard this expression used similarly once before.  On the 'Wordwizard' website, we have only come up with a few opinions as to whether the shortened form is (a) now generally acceptable, (b) dialect or slang, or (c) erroneous grammar. Certainly, the examples we've been able to find on Google are accompanied almost invariably by obviously wrong grammar or excesses of sentence fragments.  Has anyone any experience of (or sound statistics on!) the shortened usage, please?
115897
I am looking for the correct/common way to call the single spaces which are generally clearly visibile  in parking lots   as you can see from the picture:     I would probably call them "parking slots," but I am not sure if that is correct and I could not find any reference apart from , which clearly refers to a different context.   According to the Collins Dictionary a   is:       a space in a car park designed to be large enough to park a vehicle in   Any reference to American English or British English would be appreciated.