Be sure to use a good dictionary to help you with words' actual meanings and parts of speech. Here's a good one: http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Read about "to" and you'll find it does far more than simply be the word indicating a verb's infinitive form:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/to
Do the same thing with "for."
The usual idiomatic phrasing is "angry with" or "angry at" -- and they mean approximately the same thing. I tend to use "angry with" when it's followed by the name or a reference to a person, but I don't know if that's common or not.
Sometimes having a list (or a link) of phrasal verbs is a handy thing to have around, too. None of these can be explained, though; they simply are normal and common expressions.
http://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/phrasal-verbs-list.htm
The verbs "could," "would," and "should" are past tense forms (in your sentence, present perfect which is one of the past tenses) and usually are referring to possibilities, not factual occurrences.
instead -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instead
instead of -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/instead%20of
Let me know if something here doesn't make sense.
Please help me with these:
1. Difference between 'to' and 'for' and give some example sentences
For me, TO is used with a verb, like the infinitive and FOR is used with a noun or gerund.
2. Why cant we say angry to?
For me, angry is only used with AT or WITH and not TO but I can't explain the difference between angry AT or ANGRY with.
3. could have Vpp means regret only?
For me, it's a yes. For example, It could have been a lot easier to ride the bus.
4. The difference between instead of and instead
For number 4, I really don't know the difference.
I hope you guys can correct me. Thank you so much!
3 answers
Thank you so much! Very big help indeed!
You're welcome!
1 answer