
Read clear grammar explanations and example sentences to help you understand how determiners and quantifiers are used. Then, put your grammar knowledge into practice by doing the exercises.
Choose a topic and start improving your English grammar today.
Do you need to improve your English grammar?
Join thousands of learners from around the world who are improving their English grammar with our online courses.
Hello beckysyto
In informal speaking, it's common for 'there is' to be used with a plural noun or singular noun and plural noun combination, so, for example, 3 is more common in speaking than 4. When, however, the first noun phrase is plural (as in 5), then 'there are' is more commonly used.
So, to answer your question whether 'there is/are' agrees with the first noun phrase in the sentence, the answer is yes, at least in informal speaking.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello agie,
Both forms are correct and there is no difference in meaning.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello agie
Both are grammatically correct. If it's clear that you're talking about the morning, then 1 is probably sufficiently clear.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Vitub
I'm afraid I don't know enough about either sentence to be able to know what they mean, so I can't really explain them or offer any other recommendations about them. If you include the full sentence, we might be able to help you more, but please note that in general we don't explain sentences that come from other texts unless you have a very specific question about them.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Sooraj
The form I would recommend here is 'to invite all of you'; the other two options are not correct in standard British English.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello tshantanu0,
The structure here is a defining relative clause and you can use either 'who' or 'that' as the relative pronoun here - it makes no difference. I'm not aware of any rule which says 'that' needs to be used after those words.
You can read more about relative clauses on these pages:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Abhimanyu Hannah
Yes, there's quite a lot behind the use or omission of articles, but I'm afraid it's not something that can be explained in a few short sentences. I'd recommend you work through the pages in this section, as well as read through our Articles 1 and 2 pages. If you have a specific question after that, please feel to ask it here.
Most people don't differentiate between 'log in' and 'log on', though there is a difference. You can read about it in the Difference.wiki or by doing an internet search for 'difference between login and logon'.
When someone is 'on call', they are available to work, but you must call them to ask them to work. This is typical for doctors and IT technicians, among others. I'm not familiar with 'in call', though you can be 'in a call', i.e. you are on the phone at that time and are not available to speak to someone else.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Inqilab,
The sentence has going to, which is a present continuous form as you say. However, it is followed by a passive form: a passive infinitive (to be held). Passive forms require the past participle, so held is used instead of hold.
Here's another example:
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello cbenglish,
Both 'a' and 'the' are possible.
If you use 'a' then we understand that there are a number of signs of a tender heart and this is one of them. If you use 'the' then you are suggesting that only one thing shows a tender heart.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello dipakrgandhi
You have keen eyes! Good job spotting this inconsistency. To determine whether to use 'a' or 'an', you have to think how a word (in this case, an initialism) is pronounced -- as far as I know, 'SIP' is pronounced 'ess ai pee' and not 'sip'. In this case, as you can see from my transliteration of the pronunciation, the word begins with a vowel sound (the letter 'e' that is underlined). Therefore, 'an' would be the correct form.
All the best
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello cbenglish,
Generally, the definite article is required when you are describing a selected group:
all of / some of / most of / none of / half of / a majority of / a minority of the Indians surveyed
However, sometimes the article is omitted with half of, a minority of and a majority of. So in this case, both options are possible.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi dipakrgandhi,
I can't say for sure without knowing the context, but presumably it's because this is the first time the reporter has mentioned this particular report. Although we speak about 'general' and 'specific' determiners, remember the key issue in many cases is whether we think the person we are speaking to will know which particular thing we are speaking about. If this is a radio news report, for example, and the reporter is just beginning her segment on it, she could not reasonably assume that her audience knows about the media report being discussed at this point in time.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello cbenglish,
The term love marriage is used in the same way as marriage in terms of the use of articles. For general use all articles are possible, but there are slight differences in meaning.
a + singular countable noun
we can use this with general meaning when we are talking about something which defines the group.
For example:
In other words, being an impressive sight is one of the characteristics of an elephant; if we saw an animal and it was not impressive then we could be fairly sure that it was not an elephant. We are talking about any elephant here - it is true of them all.
the + singular noun
we can use this with general meaning when we are talking about our image or concept of the noun.
For example:
Here we are not talking about a real elephant, but rather the concept of 'elephant' in our heads.
no article + plural countable noun or uncountable noun
we use this to talk about what is normal or typical of a type. It may or may not be true of all individuals but it is typical of most.
For example:
Here we are talking about the average height of Swedes, not any particular person or concept.
The distinctions are subtle but sometimes can be important.
For example, we can say with general meaning:
However, we cannot say:
This is because being in danger of becoming extinct may be true but it does not define the whale.
I hope that helps to clarify it for you.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello dipakrgandhi,
In my explanation I said we can use no article + plural countable noun or uncountable noun. 'Elephant' is a countable noun, so we need to say
Elephants are an impressive sight.
'The whales' would refer to a particular group of whales, not whales in general. For example, you might talk about 'the whales of the Atlantic Ocean' or similar.
When we say
A whale is an impressive sight
we are talking about a characteristic that is typical or representative of whales: being impressive is one of the things that goes with being a whale.
The reason we can't say
A whale might become extinct
is because being extinct is not something that happens to a whale, and not something which defines what a whale is.
The changes in 'love marriage' would be the same as the examples I gave. The choice of noun does not affect this.
Peter
The LeanEnglish Team
Hi Sheikh Salauddin,
Sometimes phrases like 'John's' are considered possessive forms of nouns and sometimes they are classed as a kind of possessive determiner. Since our grammar is a learner's grammar, we don't get into that kind of issue, but I expect you could find some discussion of it in the English Language and Usage StackExchange if you're interested.
'If I were a king!' is technically an incomplete sentence, but would probably be fine in most cases if the result clause were clear from the situation or context.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hi cbenglish,
When we speak about what is explained in radio, television, newspaper or new website reports, we also refer to this as 'the news' (with the definite article 'the' always used). So when you speak about 'listening to the news', it's correct to say 'the news' (and just 'news' is not correct).
You could say just 'read newspapers' instead of 'read the newspapers'. If you say 'the newspapers', there is some suggestion that the reader knows which newspapers you're talking about, but not necessarily. If it were my essay, I would most likely say 'the newspapers', as we often use 'the' here even when it's not completely clear which newspapers we're talking about.
All the best,
Kirk
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Risa warysha,
A quantifier is a type of determiner. The relevant wikipedia page (here) contains a list of the most common kinds of determiners.
Pre-, post- and central describe the positions of different determiners.
Pre-determiners come first, central determiners come next and postdeterminers come last.
Example: all the thirty women
Here, 'all' is a pre-determiner, 'the' is a central determiner and 'thirty' is a postdeterminer.
There is some debate as to whether this terminology is helpful. Postdeterminers often have adjectival characteristics, for example, which other determiners do not, and are not only identified by their position.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Mohd Zaffar,
Both forms are possible here. Without a wider context there is nothing to show which would be preferable.
Generally, we use past simple for sequences of actions (first... later...). We use past perfect when an earlier action has some relevance to or influence on a later action.
You can read more about the past perfect on these pages:
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/b1-b2-grammar/past-perfect
https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/english-grammar-reference/past-perfect
Please note that we are on a page on the topic of articles and determiners, not the past perfect. We ask users to post questions on relevant pages as it helps to keep the comments sections useful for other users who may have similar questions.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team
Hello Mohd Zaffar,
Both sentences are grammatically correct. Which one you need will depend upon the context and what you are trying to say.
The first sentence describes an ongoing situation. It tells us that you still know 'them' and up to the present time have not had any disputes.
The second sentence describes finished time. It tells us that when you knew 'them' there were no disputes, but we understand that you no longer know them for some reason, so there cannot now be any disputes. You might use this sentence if the situation has changed:
They used to live in our time and we never had any disputes with them. They moved away last year.
Peter
The LearnEnglish Team