0
Taka Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
Drawings
Do you native speakers use 'drawings for children' as 'books for children in which kids can enjoy drawing'?
Top answer
Hi, Do you native speakers use 'drawings for children' as 'books for children in which kids can enjoy drawing'? No, if I understand your question correctly. I'd say 'a book of drawings for children', meaning a book that contains drawings for children to look at.
- Hi, Do you native speakers use 'drawings for children' as 'books for children in which kids can enjoy drawing'?
- No, if I understand your question correctly.
- I'd say 'a book of drawings for children', meaning a book that contains drawings for children to look at.
- On the other hand, 'a drawing book for children' sounds like a book with blank pages on which children can draw.
- Best wishes, Clive
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Hi,
Do you native speakers use 'drawings for children' as 'books for children in which kids can enjoy drawing'?
No, if I understand your question correctly.
I'd say 'a book of drawings for children', meaning a book that contains drawings for children to look at.
On the other hand, 'a drawing book for children' sounds like a book with blank pages on which childr
Do you native speakers use 'drawings for children' as 'books for children in which kids can enjoy drawing'?
No, if I understand your question correctly.
I'd say 'a book of drawings for children', meaning a book that contains drawings for children to look at.
On the other hand, 'a drawing book for children' sounds like a book with blank pages on which childr
00
Then how would you interpret this 'drawings for children', Clive?
The more narrowly a theory is defined by and agrees with experimental or observational facts, the more secure its status. It's rather as in those drawings for children, where a pattern emerges from an apparently random set of dots when lines are drawn between them in the proper sequence.
The more narrowly a theory is defined by and agrees with experimental or observational facts, the more secure its status. It's rather as in those drawings for children, where a pattern emerges from an apparently random set of dots when lines are drawn between them in the proper sequence.
00
Hi,
Then how would you interpret this 'drawings for children', Clive?
The more narrowly a theory is defined by and agrees with experimental or observational facts, the more secure its status. It's rather as in those drawings for children, where a pattern emerges from an apparently random set of dots when lines are drawn between them in the proper sequen
Then how would you interpret this 'drawings for children', Clive?
The more narrowly a theory is defined by and agrees with experimental or observational facts, the more secure its status. It's rather as in those drawings for children, where a pattern emerges from an apparently random set of dots when lines are drawn between them in the proper sequen
00
Related Questions