When do "In behalf" and "on behalf" is used?
351811
Firstly, learn how to formulate a question. e.g. When are "in behalf" and "on behalf" used. Simple grammar. On behalf is used when e.g. someone is acting for someone, i.e they are acting on their behalf. I don't know of any usage for "in behalf"
655981
The correct phrase is "by accident." "On accident" is incorrect.
862748
"Who" is used when it is the subject of the clause in which it appears.  "Whom" is the object of a verb or preposition.  Try to substitute another pronoun in its place and see how the sentence sounds.  If "he" or "she" or "we" or "they" sounds correct then use "who".  If "him" or "her" or "us" or "them" sounds correct, then use "whom".  \n\nYou would say "He is going to the movie", not "Him is going to the movie, so you say "Who is going to the movie?", not "Whom is going to the movie?"\n\nYou say "These books are for us", not "These books are for we", so you should say "For whom are these books?", not "For who are these books?"\n\n"She is the winner" is right; "Her is the winner" is wrong. Therefore say "Susan, who is the winner, is sitting over there.", not "Susan, whom is the winner, is sitting over there."\n\n"Give them the money" is right.  "Give they the money" is wrong.\n"Give whom the money?" is right.  "Give who the money?" is wrong.
170353
To determine whether who or whom should be used in a sentence, at least according to traditional usage, many people may find it easier to recast the sentence in non-interrogative form using a personal pronoun and determine whether they would use he or she (subjects) or him or her (direct and indirect objects) instead of who or whom. For example in determining:\n\nWho did you call? versus Whom did you call? \nthis yields:\n\nincorrect -- *You called she. \ncorrect -- You called her. \nSince the former sentence is a solecism, this sentence calls for whom rather than who.\n\nHowever, in determining:\n\nWho shall I say is calling? versus Whom shall I say is calling? \nthis yields:\n\ncorrect -- I shall say she is calling. \nincorrect -- *I shall say her is calling. \nindicating that who is appropriate for this question. (The incorrect form *Whom shall I say is calling? would be an example of hypercorrection resulting from a confused attempt to follow prescriptive grammar.)\n\nBasically, whom is used whenever there is no verb to be in an inflected form referring to it. Thus:\n\nHe was the man whom we later learnt to be a constable. \nHe was the man who we later learnt was a constable. \nHe was the man whom we thought a constable. \nWho will come? \nAlso, whom is the form used whenever there are prepositions involved. Again this is anologous to personal pronouns, for which the object form is also used after a preposition. For example:\n\nTo whom have you been talking? (Compare: You have been talking to him.) \nFor whom have you taken these marvellous photographs? \nWith whom are you going to the cinema? \nWe have been discussing plans with them, of whom we have grown rather fond these days. \nWe have been discussing plans with them, whom we have grown rather fond of these days. \nThe indirect object is normally formed with to, so is generally just a particular example of the usage with prepositions (to whom). In some situations, whom can also be used by itself to represent the indirect object. However this is only really used in contexts where the direct object is omitted, e.g. Whom will you tell? Where the direct object is expressed, to is generally included, even where an analogous sentence using a personal pronoun might use the pronoun as the indirect object, e.g. You will tell him a story but To whom will you tell a story?\n\nThe same rules apply to declined pronouns whomever and whomsoever.
1065405
For reference or to copy?
249748
u mean against user or for user?
864918
leaving out the upon would create a confusion. in this sentence upon holds the place of words like "on" or "with"\n\nI am an english teacher... and this is really one of the few words that are hard to explain
741914
"Whom" is obsolete in conversational English, but it's still used quite a bit in written English and certain formal speech.  Your examples above are nominative/genitive/accusative, so it would be\n\nWho/Whose/Whom\n\nThere is also the dative case, which in English is usually expressed with the prepositions "to" or "for".  A good rule of thumb is to use "whom" when you'd use "me" in a similar situation.
692856
If I understand you correctly it could be...\n\nI have received your request...or\n\nI am in receipt of your request...\n\nYou may want to add "dated May 10, 2006" or whatever the date of the request is to clarify. Is thath what you mean? If you are looking to say that you received a request of a third party and would like to include the name, you could say...\n\nI received John Doe's request...or\n\nI am in receipt of John Doe's request.\n\nGood luck!
662941
None because:\n\n1.) There are robots all around making our lives easier.\n(took out comma)\n\n2.) There are robots all around, which make our lives easier.\n(added comma)\n*Note: This seems to be incorrect, so I will say that the answer MAY be #2, depending on how you were taught English.\n\n3.) There are robots all around; they make our lives easier.\n(changed comma into semicolon)
635688
I am not sure but I know that this made possible through the Necessary and Proper Clause or the ELastic Clause.  SO maybe it is something similar to the word elastic. Good Luck!
721149
Perhaps one easy way to help you distinguish and remember: look at the word their or there without the T.  There - T = here (a location)  Their-t = heir (a person).   \n\nThere always refers to a place.  Their always refers to a person or persons.
950278
in place of (i.e. replacing somebody or something or taking their place)
836097
How about simply:\nglad to help\nglad to be of assistance\nhappy to assist?
769922
she said provide which mean contribute to or give...sounds clear to me..\n\nThen why are you confusing us with your wording of her question. Copy and paste is all it takes to keep from confusing people..one word can change an entier sentence
231402
per procurationem (by agency). This is a Latin phrase meaning that you are signing the letter on somebody else's behalf; if they are not there to sign it themselves, etc.
689532
to say the first, you are asking for help, you are asking for advise toa particular problem. \n\nthe second is you giving someone else advise, like "please be advised the lift is out of order"