quotation marks. This helps to indicate that the added words are not part of the original quote but have been included for clarity or to improve the sentence's grammatical structure.
To make a quotation clearer or fit grammatically, you can add words or phrases within square brackets [ ] to clarify pronouns or verb tenses, or to provide additional context. This is often done when integrating a quote into your own sentence while maintaining the original meaning.
No. A direct quote is words from another author (besides yourself) that are copied verbatim. This always needs quotes. Paraphrasing does not need quotes. Paraphrasing is when you restate the author's ideas in your own words. However, paraphrases sometimes incorporate direct quotes and these will need to be enclosed in quotation marks. The source should be acknowledged. A paraphrase is not a direct quote and does not require quotation marks. You do, however need to give credit to its author through correct citation.
Making a sentence using the word Clearer Picture Quality
The phrase "Any update on this, please?" is grammatically correct. However, adding a comma after "this" would make it clearer and easier to read: "Any update on this, please?"
The sentence is not grammatically correct. A clearer version could be: "In the suburbs, the bus only runs Monday to Friday." This revision improves clarity by rearranging the words and adding necessary punctuation.
Not really. The "himself" is redundant. "The doctor offered some help" is clearer.
The sentence is a run-on and lacks proper punctuation to separate the clauses. To correct it, you could add a comma after "midnight" and a conjunction like "but" before "someone" to make it clearer and more grammatically correct.
It makes sense, but it is not grammatically correct.I would have done it if you had told me sooner.No, no and no. Never use "would have" in an if-clause! Use had: I would have done it if you had told me.
I'm not sure I understand your question. What phrase are you asking about, "children for school?" If that is what you mean, it could be correct depending on how it is used in the sentence. For example, a sentence such as "We must prepare the children for school." would be correct. If you make your question a bit clearer I could help more.
Nah your wrong!It is "I had visited you when you called me".That is a grammatically acceptable sentence. It would require a certain type of context for it to make sense. For example, let us say, you phoned me up to complain that I never visit you. But I protest, I had visited when you called me. More likely I would put it, I had already visited you when you called me to complain that I wasn't visiting you. That would be much clearer.
It depends on the sentence but in general, it is usually the subject that does the action. Example: The red cat lounged on the warm patio. The red cat (subject) does the action (lounged) Sometimes, however, the actual "subject" in a sentence is hidden (like when it is written in passive voice). Example: The revisions were completed. The subject of this sentence, grammatically, is "revisions" so you could say that the revisions did the action (were completed). You could add onto that sentence and make it clearer, however. Example: The revisions were completed by unknown bystanders. In this sentence, even though "revisions" is still grammatically the subject, you could say that "unknown bystanders," which is the direct object, does the action in the sentence. Really, if you are reading a sentence and you are unsure of who or what is doing the action in the sentence, just ask yourself "who?" Example: The red cat lounged on the warm patio. (who lounged? the red cat) The revisions were completed by unknown bystanders. (who revised? unknown bystanders) The revisions were completed. (what was completed? the revisions)
I don't believe so. I did edit to make the sentence clearer.