I think there a rule of specificity by inference where something is considered definite by the circumstance or inference and I wonder if the above situations fit that rule.
eg, I am drinking the water.
I am opening the door.
I am somewhat confused as to how much and far can a person extend this application and in fact, I am not so sure of its general concept.
Top answer
Hi, Please tell me how they are different. Q: What is he doing? A: 1.
— Clive
Hi, Please tell me how they are different.
Q: What is he doing?
A: 1.
He is playing the cards .
2.
Free · every Monday
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0I have a horrible feeling that what I am going to say is just going to confuse you even more. I'm sorry if my explanation is not good.02br 02br 00In sentence 2 'cards' is a noun meaning 'a card game' - not the cards themselves but the game played with them. So sentence 2 is analagous to 'he is playing soccer' or 'he is playing Monopoly'. It's fine.02br 02br
0Hi Nona,02br 02br 00I think I am faintly aware of what you are saying about with the phrase 'playing with', but how would you support your argument with this? 01i00Violin02i00 is a noun, isn't it?02br 02br 00I am playing 01u00the 02u00violin. 0-
0Ah you've got me there. 05000We do play instruments directly.02br 02br 00However, there is still a difference. You could say 'he is playing the violin' - he is using the violin to make music. 'he is playing with the violin' - he is fiddling around with the violin not making music with it.02br 02br 00That small boy is playing violin - isn't he wonde