Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Neither. Both of these would be ungrammatical.Which word would be appropriate for the blank, which or whose?
I think he's an idiot if he thinks, as a native speaker, that "which" belongs there by itself. Either that, or he didn't actually read the rest of the sentence correctly. You can easily tell as a native speaker just by how it sounds that something is wrong there.A translator who is an English native speaker says "which" would be appropriate.
Ugh, that's not as bad as "which", but that is not proper use of a colon. This is syntax that reminds me of what Yu-Gi-Oh cards started doing recently, where that kind of thing makes sense because the purpose is conciseness and clarity in technical language. But real conversations don't work like that. If someone wrote that on a forum, it would look to me like it was written by a robot.My professor recommended I change my major : advice I did not follow.
I've read quite a few legal documents and never seen that. Legalese is not so fundamentally different from English that it sacrifices basic grammar rules, especially not to the detriment of clarity which is the whole point of why it's different from regular English in the first place.He says this type of "which" can be used in legal documents.
I would almost approve of that if what preceded it was a semicolon, but what precedes it is a comma.How about using "that"
That might be the case. Legal English has its own rules. But it's not a good reason to use those rules in normal situations.He says this type of "which" can be used in legal documents.