0
Top answer
In ordinary everyday contexts, the sentence is awkward and unnatural-sounding whichever you choose. It sounds like something from the pages of a very old book. It also should be "in a rage", by the way.
- In ordinary everyday contexts, the sentence is awkward and unnatural-sounding whichever you choose.
- It sounds like something from the pages of a very old book.
- It also should be "in a rage", by the way.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
In ordinary everyday contexts, the sentence is awkward and unnatural-sounding whichever you choose. It sounds like something from the pages of a very old book.
It also should be "in a rage", by the way.
It also should be "in a rage", by the way.
00
This doesn't make sense.
Perhaps you mean:
He eyes me with rage.
or
He looks at me with rage in his eyes.
Perhaps you mean:
He eyes me with rage.
or
He looks at me with rage in his eyes.
00
teechrThis doesn't make sense.Perhaps you mean:He eyes me with rage.orHe looks at me with rage in his eyes.I believe that "who am/is in (a) rage" is intended as a relative clause modifying "me". The question of whether it should be "am" to match the referent of "who" is a perennial favourite, but rather an artificial one since we almost never use the pattern
00
GPYwe almost never use the pattern in real life.That's exactly my point!
00
the full sentence is -
He narrows his eyes at me who am/is in rage.
sorry i missed narrows.
He narrows his eyes at me who am/is in rage.
sorry i missed narrows.
0
Related Questions