In the chorus of the song "Gone Country" by Alan Jackson, there is this sentence:     She/He's gone country, look at them boots   How come them is used instead of their? I am not a native English speaker so I am interested in knowing about this peculiar (at least to me) word choice.  This  would tend to indicate that them can be used for that, but look at that boots don't really make sense?
95716
Background Nowadays, I see &quot;them&quot; used to mean &quot;those&quot; a lot. I don't know if it was as common in the past. For example, take &quot;one of &quot;. On researching about it, I found some people say it comes from a dialect of British English. Some others say it is a &quot;non-standard&quot; usage. I see this usage in Canadian English also, and it seems some people use it in a sarcastic way. Moreover, I have seen a song titled &quot;one of them days&quot;. I also read, in the book called &quot;A Broken Promise&quot;, &quot;&quot; Finally, Wikipedia says that it is a usage in  (a common name for the Southern Midland dialect of American English):  Pronouns and demonstratives &quot;Them&quot; is sometimes used in place of &quot;those&quot; as a demonstrative in both nominative and oblique constructions. Examples are &quot;Them are the pants I want&quot; and &quot;Give me some of them crackers.&quot;    Question(s): What would you say about the usage of this word? Is it correct? Could we use it in daily speech? Could this usage go beyond a specific dialect and be used in other dialects, regions, etc.? Does it really originate from Appalachian English? Why did this usage become popular among other English speakers? Note: I have already seen a similar question:  However, it only says, &quot;ungrammatical,&quot; there. This question is specific to this situation only, and there is more to it.
6758
Can you explain more?  I do not know when we can use them in the sentence.  Can we use them instead of each other?     They have a beautiful home.   They have a beautiful house.
120971
Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.   sbj: fathers         det: our vrb: brought forth         obj: nation                 det: a                 adj: new                 adj: *conceived*                         adv: &lt;in&gt;                                 obj: liberty                 cnj: and                 adj: *dedicated*                         adv: &lt;to&gt;                                 obj: proposition                                         det: the                                         adj: -that-                                                 sbj: men                                                         det: all                                                 vrb: are created                                                         cmp: equal         adv: &lt;on&gt;                 obj: continent                         det: this         adv: ...?   I'm working on this but can't wrap my head around the phrase in bold. I know that it's adverbial phrase of time, but what kind of phrase is it exactly? What part of speech is 'ago'? Sources don't seem to agree.
90927
I was looking at the title of :     To whom does the Islamic State sell their oil?   and it sounds strange to me. Shouldn't the word order be the following?     Whom does the Islamic State sell their oil to?   Or are both correct? And what is the rule that dictates the correctness?
77441
The furniture in our classroom ___ uncomfortable.   Should I use is or are here? I found on the internet things like all of furniture is and house full of furniture is.  But nothing about my example. Personally I think that correct is is, but website where I found this says that correct is are. So I'm writing here to find out.
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.
75506
Which of the following is grammatical?        He had lollies be they red or blue?    He had lollies be them red or blue?      It seems as if it could be them as an object of be.
21423
It is from . It is at around 8 minute and 39 second. Here it goes:     Culinary cultural fusion is all the rage; more novels translated from languages then ever before, although few are read, and in the surest sign of cultural globalization, football, the world's game, finally has reached America.   I guess the sentence would make sense if the preposition in were dropped out. Could you please tell me what did the host use it for?
110831
Head or tail sound fine to my ESL ears.  What's the reasoning behind the plural usage?  I looked it up on etymonline but didn't find anything interesting.
42588
I've often heard people saying this. And even I say it when someone accuses me of doing something that I didn't do.  I'd say:  Why would I do that?  But what's the grammar behind it?  Is it future from the past tense or something or what? It's obviously not a conditional construction 😒  Context from SE01 EP02 Austin &amp; Ally  Austin: what does the jacket have to do with the music video?  Trish: It's a line in Ally's song, "my jacket's in the lost and found."  Ally: "my jacket"? It says "I like it." The line is "I like it when you hang around."  Dez: "hang around"? I thought it said "kangaroo." ♪ I like it when you kangaroo. ♪.  Ally: Why would I write "I like it when you kangaroo"?
112217
Where did they go?   Where do they went?   Can you please advise which of above forms is correct?  I'm pretty sure that first one is fine but wondering about second one.   Can I use a second form as well or it's incorrect?
65178
Does it sound unnatural to you (natives) when people skip 's' ending of the verb in 3rd person? Heard it many times (e.g. in 50 cent songs - she go, she have, etc.) and always wondered how much it sounds ok.
64195
What's the grammar behind A'warring, from the lyrics of Symphony of Destruction by Megadeth? It's the first time I'm seeing the use of such apostrophe.
16807
This question may seem to be very simple, but something I get confused whenever I want to speak.  I read a book entitled "re-start your English", and saw a sentence.     This is a leg. It is part of your body.      This is a neck. It is 'a' part of your body.   Why didn't they use 'a' in the first sentence? And why did they use one in the second one?  I'm not a native, so I hope you will please understand,  even if there's something awkward about my question.
120585
It's time something was done about the problem.   It is a sentence from Murphy's "Grammar". Using was confused me, for me it should be were. It looks like this clause is in subjunctive mood&mdash;something that is unreal / imaginary, and in that case you always use were for any object.  Unless, of course, it is not the subjunctive mood, what would knock me down.
52988
I was wondering why this expression is not “God saves the Queen”. According to my very first English teacher, when the subject is he, she or it, “to save” is conjugated “he/she/it saves”.  Is it an exception?
40190
Yesterday, I've listened to a song called "Fear not this night". I find the syntax unusual (as a foreigner, I have never encountered it). Is it the same meaning as "Don't fear this night" ? What's the slight difference between these 2 ?  Thank you for your time.