RonPurewal Wrote:You're welcome.

hi Ron
Thanks to you, I understand the choice between" laws requiring" and" laws to require" quite well now. Yet I wonder that should not the option B be" requiring turtle-excluder devices BE on shrimp nets is protecting" ？

Also"” Even if "that" were included, your version would change the meaning of the sentence. In this sentence, "requiring that devices be..." doesn't imply that all of the shrimp boats should have the devices (as implied by context). Instead, that wording would just mean, "H...

Is d wrong because it contradicts what stimulus says?

jnelson0612 Wrote:

bonniewjx Wrote:Is d wrong because it contradicts what stimulus says?

Hi Bonnie,
I'm not sure what you mean by "stimulus". Do you mean the argument itself?

Yes

B. and producing enough energy on a commercial scale for electricity to be generated efficiently and to heat Can't "to heat" be parallel to "to be generate"? "...for electricity to heat homes" sounds OK to me..although I know B is wrong because it should be "to pro...

E --- compounds ... and they (anything wrong with this structure?) yes, something is indeed wrong. at best , 'they' is an ambiguous pronoun that potentially refers either to 'antioxidants'/'compounds' or to 'health benefits'. at worst it refers to 'health benefits', the subject of the preceding sen...

I have a little silly question here..Maybe i don't grasp the grammar here..

can "those who" be followed by "VERBing" without any verb?
isn't "those who still harboring..."a run-on sentence?