A complete sentence has a subject, verb, and compliment and is intelligible or makes sense.  The verb should refer to an action or state of being of the subject and the compliment should refer to that action and subject.  Example: complete sentence - We have not studied that subject.\nIncomplete sentence - We have . . . sometimes it takes . . . many people think . . .
124890
Bush can't even pronounce words, let alone string them into a coherent thought.
444321
It is a lot like the subject of a sentence.  It is a noun that is DOING the action rather than receiving.  Such as "The dog ran."  Dog, in that sentence, would be nominative.  But if I said "I walked my dog."  The dog would be the object of the verb and would be accusative, not nominative.
606363
I would go with A. Even if you phrase a question you would not be using the word based on knowledge of its meaning, because it is unfamiliar to you. You should use the words in the same sentence to try and figure out the meaning and then look the word up to reference it back.
537570
It typically means that you are missing the noun subject of a sentence or the verb. It will also come up if an offending sentence is a just a clause, e.g. "If the boy were walking his dog". It will also show up if a sentence is too wordy with lots of parenthetical expressions without the proper use of commas, semicolons, colons , etc.\n\nHope this helps!
346048
The first one is correct. The adverb "well" describes the action of the verb: in this case, it tells us how you turned out.\n\n"Good" is an adjective that modifies a noun. You behave well, so that means you have good behavior.
207104
Either:\n\nApproval of Application Completed\n\n- OR -\n\nApproval of Application - Complete
579996
You can use both, but it's not a question of "subject/verb" agreement!\nIt's linked to "If" as in "If I were you". It's just a matter of feasability of the action (is it very probable or not).\nAs for the "subject/verb" agreement, it has to be "was" because the only subject is "your answer" and if you had to change the end of the sentence by a singular noun "a photo", it'd stay the same!\nHope it helps!
129191
[All I did]\nThe phrase inside the square brackets is the subject of the sentence. It consists of a pronoun, "all," and a relative clause, "(that) I did." Note that the relativizer "that" is optional. In your version of the sentence, it has been omitted.\n\n[was review] \n"Was review" is the verb.  [Was]is an auxiliary verb in the sentence.  "Was" is used with the infinitive of the verb "Review" to express intention, obligation, or future action: "what we covered in class."\n\n"what we covered in class" can be thought of as a noun clause.\n\nI hope this helps!
230405
Both are correct.  The verb is "give back" and both objects may optionally be moved between the main part of the verb "give" and the particle "back".  The two preceding posters, while well-meaning, are absolutely wrong.
96778
The sentence "I watched figure skating yesterday." is just fine.  Well, done.  Don't listen to all the other people that want you to change it to make it all complicated and serious sounding, they're just trying to sound intelligent.  There's absolutely nothing wrong with writing simple sentences when you're just learning a language.\nWhat is you first language anyway?  You seem to know English pretty well so far.
375248
There's an easy way to tell- take out the other person and see if the sentence sounds correct.\n\nFor example: "Me and Johnny went to the store." is incorrect, because without 'Johnny', it becomes "Me went to the store.", which we know is wrong.  Hence the correct version is 'Johnny and I went to the store.".  (Don't ask me why you have to switch it around that way, it just sounds better than "I and Johnny went to the store.").\n\nAlternatively, in the sentence "John took Trisha and me to the mall.", using 'me' is correct because if you took 'Trisha' out, you'd get "John took me to the mall.", versus the incorrect "John took I to the mall." if you tried "John took Trisha and I to the mall.".\n\nThere's a complex rationale behind it about the subjects and objects of sentences and all that, but I find this is the best way to explain it- simple and to the point, with a way to test it.\n\nHope that helps!
506165
Hate to say this, but Americans suck at English and won't even know what a verb, participle, or preposition are!!!\n\nGive an example of what you are talking about - then maybe someone will know.
495960
BOTH sentences are already in the passive voice. The subject RECEIVES the action expressed in the verb. "Are expressed" refers back to "patents." "Was funded" refers back to "the study."\n\nTo change to active voice, the subject PERFORMS the action that is expressed in the verb.\n\nThese statements are in the active voice:\nThe patents, if allowed to stand, will create a windfall of royalties for the school.\nThe National Cancer Institute funded the study with a grant.
136465
Read sentence on left side downward, explanation on right\n\nMatilda    = Noun (person)\nanswered   = verb  (action or something felt or done)\nthe        = article ('the', 'a', 'an' are articles)  \nquestion   = noun (thing)\nquickly    = adverb (explains the verb "answered" - often ends in 'ly')\nand        = conjunction (joins two thoughts, "but" is also a conjunction)\nshe        = pronoun ("she" used in place of the noun "Matilda")\nwon        = verb (action someone did)\nthe        = (article)\ngolden     = adjective (describes the type of noun 'prize')\nprize      = noun (thing)\nwith       = preposition (shows relationship or location of Mathilda and team)\nthe        = (article)\nteam.      = noun (thing)\n\nHooray!    = Interjection (a shout, used with exclamation mark !)\n\nMatilda answered the question quickly and she won the golden prize with the team.  Hooray!
341631
Gone Car - Jay and R M both have the right idea here. For purposes of clarity and ease of understanding, whenever possible a pronoun should be used in a sentence after the noun to which it refers. The sentence as you present it is not good English for this reason. Instead you could say here\n\n"Do you think it is a good idea when we study a sentence to break it and then restructure it?"\n\nor \n\n "Do you think it is a good idea to break a sentence and then reconstruct it when we are studying it?"\n\nor \n\n"Do you think, when we study a sentence, it is a good idea to break it and then restructure it?"\n\nor\n\n"When we study a sentence is it a good idea, do you think, to break it and then restructure it?"\n\n\nThese sentences are all correct, but I like the first two a little more than the last two because I think they are simpler in form and therefore a little easier to understand.  Notice though that in all four sentences here the "it"  which occurs twice and which refers to "sentence" is found both times after the word "sentence" has already been used. That just makes it easier for everyone to understand. Note also that in the first sentence you could include commas after "idea" and "sentence" if you like.\n\n-m
398014
This might be less specifically useful, but really helpful in the long run:  The easiest way to write these kinds of sentences is to look the words up in a dictionary or thesaurus and put together a sentence that makes sense with simpler words.\n\nFor example:  jubilant is similar to happy.  It might be easier to come up with a way to use happy in a sentence than jubilant.\n\nGood luck with the rest.
184373
Sentence number 2 is correct.\n\nThe reason sentence 1 is not correct is because it has a dangling participle. In other words, the participle cannot distinguish what it wants to describe. \n\nIt could be that you realize how much different you have been than before (like in sentence 2)\nOR------\nit could be that you realize how FREQUENTLY you have been different than before.\n\nIf you read sentence 1, you will realize that both senerios could be true. \n\nHope this helps\nThanks\nJon