2 VERBS IN A SENTENCE

唔係一句句子(sentence)只可以有一個 MAIN VERB
係一個子句(clause)只可以有一個MAIN VERB
一句句子可以由一個或多個子句組成

I have something that I want to tell you.

I have something (main clause)
that I want to tell you. (subordinate clause)
to tell (infinitive)

Infinitive, gerund and participle are not verbs

2011-05-19 14:30:24 補充：
我今天才看到這些意見

我沒有說可以省略"I"
我只是想低調地糾正發問者的錯誤

2011-05-19 14:37:42 補充：
Radioman:

你是否認為 I am afraid (that) I had had the film developed. 這句句子是錯誤的? 請明言。

謝謝!!

2011-05-20 09:29:53 補充：
I see nothing wrong with the tense of the sentence. Please tell me what is wrong. Thank you.

2011-05-21 07:28:07 補充：
Radioman, I dont think I have to check my answer with any English professionals but I welcome anybody to join our discussion. Maybe I should ask a question and see if anybody has anything to say.

2011-05-21 08:55:23 補充：
Waiman,
為什麼叫我們將"自大者, 真的無藥可治!"譯為英文呢?
言下之意，是暗示我們都是自大者嗎?
若然小弟曾作自大之言論，請明言指正。
謝謝!!

2011-05-21 23:23:22 補充：
Waiman and ed_young,
It is ok. I am cool with you guys.
Is there anything we can do to stop this guy from misleading the others? I can ignore his abusive remarks but it is wrong not to allert the others on his incorrect statements about English grammar.

2011-05-22 15:53:35 補充：
I have just asked a question on 什麼情況之下可以略去"that"字?

http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7011052200634


I will ask another question on "tense inconsistency" when I have time.

Raymond, ed_young:
Hi! Radioman(also called Iero/Funker) is so ignorant and arrogant. A leopard cannot change his spots, so don't expect this guy to stop making his hostile comments or dumping his misleading statements. Don't give up!

raymond, ed_young and sik-hung :
諸君敬請將此句譯為英文 : 自大者, 真的無藥可治!

2011-05-13 19:21:50 補充：
Radioman:
自大源於自卑, 輕則情緒反覆, 重則胡言亂語,破口罵人,甚至傷人. 好自為之!

Radioman :

Raymond's answer is 100% right ! I will continue tomorrow.

2011-05-10 15:30:31 補充：
" I have(vt) something (indirect object) .................Main clause

( that ) ( I ) want(vt) to tell(infinitive) you.整句是(direct object)
.that = subordinate conj.代表I want to see you.

2011-05-10 15:57:15 補充：
依文法上說: If noun clause as object, the SUBORDINATE conj.= (THAT) can be omitted. And if the subject of clause same as the main clause also can be omitted. " I have(vt) something X X want(vt) to tell you." is OK.
(not "to see")

Raymond explains it very well. It is very important to remember (that) the rule is one verb for each clause within a sentence, and that sometimes the "that" joining a sub-ordinated clause is allowed to be "omitted".

2011-05-11 10:28:09 補充：
LauManman:
The original sentence was verbal and informal, so both the "that" and the "I" were omitted. Raymond added them back to illustrate the point. Whether the original sentence should have the "I" is irrelevant.

2011-05-21 16:19:37 補充：
Raymond:
Waiman was referring to Radioman, who has consistantly been making authoritative but incorrect statements about English grammar and usage, and verbally abusing anyone who don't agree with him.

2011-05-21 16:23:17 補充：
I mean anyone who doesn't agree with him. I had better correct it before Radioman catches it, although he does it himself a lot more often than I do.

2011-05-22 01:27:33 補充：
Raymond:
It's not easy. I have tried to ensure that every time he posted a wrong answer, there would be an alternative correct one, but he started to post misleading comments as opinions to confuse the readers, and abusive remarks to intimidate those with better answers.

2011-05-22 06:46:58 補充：
That being said, I did notice this guy did not get any new best answers and had been losing points lately, I suppose the more he wrote, the more he exposed his deficiency with the language, and his "let me teach you something" attitude followed by poor Englsh would turn people off as well.

2011-05-22 06:54:42 補充：
I did warn him not to be his own enemy, but he wouldn't listen. It seems we could continue to accompany his bad answers with correct ones, so people won't be misled, and ignore his bullying. We will give him enough rope, and in time he'll hang himself with it.