did not see
No, it is correct grammar, not a correct grammar.
Both "I have strived" and "I have striven" are grammatically acceptable past participles of the verb "to strive." "I have striven" is less common in modern usage, but both are correct.
No, it is not.If Manila is the name of a person, then "... minutes, Manila" is correct grammar but it is still not a correct grammar.
Correct grammar would be (present tense) "are you doing your shopping", or (past tense) "have you done your shopping".
No, "will be had" is not a correct grammar. The correct grammar would be "will have."
Yes
Do you mean: "Are there ways to correct grammar?" Well yes. You see, it's sort of like grading. If someone says something or their grammar incorrect, and you correct them, you are like sort of correcting their grammar and this is the only way to answer your question so.
The correct grammar is "had departed." This is because "departed" is the past participle form of the verb "depart," and when using the past perfect tense, we need to use the auxiliary verb "had" followed by the past participle form.
"On a train" is correct grammar.
No. You are omitting the words "it is" as in "It is great to see you and Bob."
no_____If the sentence is You do do that (meaning You are in the habit of doing that) the grammar is perfectly correct and the sentence 'does have correct grammar'.
If 'hung it up on the tree' is in the past tense, as in 'He hung it up on the tree!', it is correct. If it is in the present tense, then, no, it is incorrect. In the present tense, the correct way of saying it would be, 'hang' or 'hangs', not 'hung'.