Q: the structure of something とはどういう意味ですか?
A: Structure is the arrangement of pieces which made up some large object (or abstract concept)

It also has an implication that something is strong and stable (like the structure of a building).
Q: The structure of “more of something” and when to use it とはどういう意味ですか?
A: That the issue has to be more serious for someone to take action/change
Q: he builds an elaborate structure out of sticks

I dont understand 'out of sticks'
can I say it 'from sticks'?

A: Hai you can say ‘from sticks’. It will also be correct.
Q: The structure is going up とはどういう意味ですか?
A: something of large size like a building or bridge is being construct.
Q: Solid structure とはどういう意味ですか?
A: yes, but it can also be anything that isn't liquid or gas, so wood, plastic, even paper :) it is anything that if you just let it be, will not change shape, size or location on its own.

So if you have a piece of wood, unless you apply force to it, it won't change. But if you try to put water on a table, it will spread everywhere without your help because it is liquid.

I hope that's understandable haha :)


Q: I want to use these structures in my sentence, can you give me the meanings and some examples?
- When it comes to
- ..for the sake of

“When it comes to” can be used as a phrase meaning “when it is time for.” or “on the topic of.” Here are some examples.

“When it comes to motorcycles, he knows his stuff!”

“I know all the rules on paper, but when it comes to actually kicking the ball, I am hopeless.”

“When it comes to leaving a tip, I try to be generous.”

But it is used outside of that form as well. This sentence is simply using “it” in place of “the band.” The focus is on the band rather than the city:

“The band will go on tour soon. When it comes to our city I will be first in line for tickets.”

To do something “for the sake of” something else, means you are trying to preserve it. Here are examples of “for the sake of” :

“For the sake of brevity I will keep it simple.”

To preserve the brevity.

“He stopped drinking for the sake of his family.”

To preserve his family.

“She stopped smoking for the sake of her health.”

To preserve her health.

“For the sake of the wildlife in this park we ask that you refrain from littering and keep your dog on a leash at all times.”

To preserve the wildlife.

I hope that helps!
Q: structure を使った例文を教えて下さい。
A: Skyscrapers are a very labour intensive structure to build
Q: the structure "not only ... but also" を使った例文を教えて下さい。
A: Not only are you beautiful but you're also kind.

Not only is she rude but also annoying

Q: structure を使った例文を教えて下さい。
A: QAの全文をご確認ください


Q: structure と construction はどう違いますか?
A: Both words are used in different ways. A Structure is referring to a building or other large permanent thing such as a big art piece. Structure is also used to describe the shape or foundation of something- “the building has solid structure” Or “the structure of the art piece is in an oval shape”.

Construction is used to refer to the process of building something. “The construction of the house is taking a long time”. But construction can also be used like the second meaning of structure I mentioned above- “the construction of the house is solid”
Q: The structure and the period which the embankment was built were discovered. と The structure of the embankment and the period in which the embankment was built were discovered はどう違いますか?
A: The structure of the embankment and the period in which the embankment was built were discovered.

This is a more complete sentence, it is clear and easy to understand. The first sentence is the shorter form:

The structure and the period which the embankment was built were discovered.

But it has some issues with grammar and phrasing, which makes it sounds awkward/unnatural to me. I would phrase it as:

Both the structure itself and the period in which the embankment was built were discovered.

Q: the structure of the economy will change と the structure of the economy will be changed はどう違いますか?
A: "the structure of economy will change" means that it will change naturally but when said "the structure of economy will be changed" it means that someone or something will make it change with force
Q: a structure leading out from the shore into a body of water と a structure leading from the shore into a body of water はどう違いますか?
A: The use of "out" implies more distance. Technically, if the structure goes into the water 2cm, you have satisfied your second sentence. But, going "out" into the water, to me, means the structure has to go far into the water.
Q: structure と construction はどう違いますか?
A: Construction is the building of a structure or object. For example, if construction is happening outside your home, then there are people building something, like a building, outside your home.

A structure is just another name for an object that has been constructed and can hold itself up. Many things can be a structure, but usually big things, such as buildings or bridges, are thought of when you talk about structures. Famous structures include the Eiffel Tower and the Statue of Liberty. As you can see, structures are exclusive to one type of thing.

Hope this helps :)


Q: What’s their complete structures?E.G. 1. How loudly she speaks. 2.How slowly he walks. Can you help analyze them in Grammar は 英語 (アメリカ) で何と言いますか?
A: Mother-tongue speakers of English don't actually think of themselves as omitting any kind of cue/clue words here. I added them because sometimes a little variation can help one pick up a second language's structures more easily. Instead of "hear," I could have used "Listen to," or "Notice" or even "I'm amazed at (how fluently he speaks)" or "It's astonishing ...."

I'd call them exclamatives, and in short versions, the exclamation mark would be more common punctuation than a period. "How hard she tried!" is an example in the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. They're NOT inverted these days: the subject still precedes the verb. No one today would say "How hard tried she!" as an exclamative. Four hundred years ago, yes. Shakespeare has Cleopatra say "How heavy weighs my lord!" meaning "It's amazing how heavy my lord weighs!" The line that Cleopatra actually says is inverted: the verb comes before the subject. But even in Shakespeare's time, inversion wasn't necessary, as the following quote shows, where the subject precedes the verb in normal, non-inverted order:

This young gentlewoman had a father — O that “had!”, >>>how sad a passage
’tis!<<< — whose skill was almost as great as his honesty

Note, by the way from that example, that the structure needn't be "How + adverb," but can also be "How + adj + det + noun." ("Det" here means the determiner: the article "a.")

The CGEL does have examples with inversion, but it's typically triggered by an auxiliary:
How often had he regretted his impetuosity!

There are tons of examples of the "how + adjective" structure in Shakespeare. How careful was I when I took my way ... How heavy do I journey on the way ... How sweet and lovely dost thou make the shame ... and scores, perhaps a hundred more. But it's a thoroughly modern and common structure in modern English. The CGEL mainly discusses it in chapter 10, specifically 10.8. One of my daughters' favorite story books when they were young girls was called "Cranberry Thanksgiving." It includes the following lines, as the three characters are eating some pie together:

"How delicious," said Maggie.
"How delightful," said Grandmother.
"How about another piece?" said Mr. Whiskers.

There's also a variation on exclamatives that uses "what" instead of "how": "Oh, what a piece of work is man!" Or "What a good player she is!" A well-known Christian hymn includes the lines "What a wonder!" Common examples might be "What a disaster!" or "What a show-off! (s/he is)," and so on. "What a fuss she made!" "What a difficult problem (this is)!"

Finally, there's even an option sometimes to omit the verb:

What nonsense! How wonderful! What a rude thing to say!

I was tempted at the outset of this to go looking for examples in the British National Corpus or the Corpus of Contemporary American English (or of soap operas), but the examples above are probably enough.

Q: "I try to learn to swim" , the structure is good ? は 英語 (アメリカ) で何と言いますか?
A: I try to learn how to swim or I tried to learn how to swim.
Trato de aprender como nadar o traté de aprender como nadar
Q: この構造はサンドイッチの片方のパンを無限に広いパンに置き換えた構造です。言い換えれば、無限に広いパンの上に有限の大きさの肉とパンが乗った構造です。The structure that replaced the one of the bread of the sandwich with infinite bread, i.e. finite length meat and bread on the infinite plane of bread. は 英語 (アメリカ) で何と言いますか?
A: 意味が全然わからないけど。。。

This structure is the one that replaced the bread on one side of the sandwich with infinite bread, i.e. that of finite meat and bread resting on an infinite amount of bread.
Q: Could you tell me the grammatical structure and the meaning of "at least none that caught on, (in Japanese itself)" ? は 英語 (アメリカ) で何と言いますか?
A: It means "or at least no equivalents that caught on". The "or at least" sort of restates the phrase before and adds to it. It's pretty common.
Q: how many structures sentences that native speakers use in chat or conversation i mean 5~10 common structures sentences. は 英語 (イギリス) で何と言いますか?
A: @taoapple11 can you go in my profile and try to answer at my question?


Q: why do you say "It's complicated." instead of "It's complicating."?

I used to think the structure was the same as "It's exciting." And "I'm excited.", but they seem to be different.
A: Complicating is not a commonly used word. I would use "confusing" instead of "complicating".
Q: structure of Japan politics is getting one of former World war second. この表現は自然ですか?
A: Note: English writes "World War II", pronounced "World War Two", or writes "the Second World War".

1. The structure of Japanese politics is becoming one from before World War II.
1. The structure of Japanese politics is becoming one from before the Second World War.
2. The structure of Japanese politics is becoming more like before World War II.
2. The structure of Japanese politics is becoming more like prior to World War II.
Q: Can you explain the grammatical structure of lines 586, 587?
A: In poetry, sometimes sentence and phrase structures are changed around to help with rhyming or meter.

I think usually English is spoken in SVO order, but it's not uncommon to use other structures. You can see the verb 'decree' at the end of the phrase where usually it would come before the objects.

The author could have said "kublai khan decreed a stately pleasure dome etc..." But apparently he didn't think it sounded good.

I'm way out of my knowledge area here...
Q: Can you explain the grammatical structure of line 190?
A: I would separate it out as, "Tell me. What did we agree on? (We agreed) that we could hire how many people?"

She turned a statement of "We agreed to hire six people." into a rhetorical question by replacing "six" with "how many" and adding a question mark (or in this case a questioning tone).
Q: Could you teach me the grammatical structure and meaning of the following sentence?
It's an excerpt from the article attached.

"a big reason why is star third..."

This sentence is on the second line in the first paragraph.
I'm guessing that it was made by inverting the sentence
'why third baseman Evan Longoria is star'.

Am I correct?
A: The Tampa Bay Rays are perennial contenders in the American League East, and a big reason why is star third baseman Evan Longoria.

broken up into pieces:

1. "The Tampa Bay Rays are perennial contenders in the American League East."

perennial contenders:
they are often in a position to win the championship.

2. "and a big reason why is star third baseman Evan Longoria."

and a big reason why is ---> Evan Longoria

also can be written as
'and a big reason why: Evan Longoria, whom is star third baseman.'

another way of writing it:

The Tampa Bay Rays are continuously doing very well in the American League East. A big reason why this is happening is because of Evan Longoria, star third baseman.