Did he get any grammatical errors when he was married twice?

He has been married twice, and this sentence is of course grammatically incorrect, and the correct expression should be that he has been married twice.

There is a mistake, it should be that he ended up getting married twice, his expression skills are average, and his knowledge is limited, so I hope to help you!

It should be changed to that you have been married twice, not you and she have been married twice, so that it is a language problem, and you should be the opposite, he has been married twice, or he has been married twice.

There is a grammatical error in this statement. It's very unsmooth, and the right thing should be that he has been married twice.

Hello, he has been married twice, this sentence is true, it means that he was once married, then divorced, and then found someone to remarry.

Hello, of course, this friend is wrong and correct, it should be that he has been married twice, so you must pay attention, if you have any questions, then contact me to wish you a happy life, good health, and all the best!

There is a grammatical error in this sentence, the knot of marriage is a verb, and the verb should be modified here, and it should be changed to: he was married twice.

In this way, he has no grammatical errors, and it should be able to show that he has been married twice.

No, he is the subject, marriage is a predicate, twice is an adverbial, it can also be said that he has been married twice.

This is a grammatical error, you should say that he was married twice, not put that word at the end, so your statement is contradictory.

Yes, it should be that he has been married twice, he has been married twice, the meaning is unclear, and the time is in the wrong place.

There is no grammatical error in this, it is just a way of descriptively causing it.

There is a slight error in the grammar, and it should be written that he has been divided twice.

There should still be a grammatical error in this statement, he said that he has been married twice, and he should say that he has been married twice.

Hello, classmate is really wrong, there are grammatical errors, he has been married twice and can't say that. It should be said that he was married twice.

Has he been married twice? This statement is false, and it should be said that whether he has been married twice, or whether he has been married twice, both of which are okay.

I don't think the position before and after is big.,Generally we say that we've been married twice.,I think there's a grammatical error.。

Of course, it has been wrong, you read it a few times, you are sure that the mouth is in general, this is calligraphy he has been married twice, not he has been married twice.

It should be said that she has been married twice. That's right, it's two marriages. Not his brother-in-law twice.

There is a certain mistake in this month, it should be said that he has been married twice.

This sentence does not read very well. It can be changed to that he has been married twice, so it is much smoother.

The meaning is understandable but awkward, so it is better to say: "He has been married twice."

He was married twice to be true.

She should have been married twice. And it cannot be said that you have been married twice.

This sentence should be said that she was married twice.

Actually, it means. It can also be expressed, but it seems that there is something wrong with it, and it can also be said that he has been married twice.

People who mix twice have to take care of their own reasons, isn't it your way of life? There is something wrong with the words.

She has been married twice, and this sentence is a statement in the language and there are no grammatical errors, hopefully.

He has been married twice, and there is nothing wrong with this sentence, and the subject-verb-object can correctly express the meaning of a sentence.

There is ambiguity. It could be changed to: He went to the United States in the first year of marriage.

Yes ambiguity.

There are two explanations: the first means going to the United States one year before the marriage, and the other is going to the United States the first year after the marriage.

I don't know if you understand it, hehe.

There are no grammatical errors, but it is easy to have different understandings.

Ambiguity is whether it is in the first year of the marriage money or the first year after the marriage.

This is the typical English grammatical structure and word order of the hand-holding parry. You tell people about the characteristics of sentence structure in Chinese, and the rest is to give examples to others, so that he can read and memorize more skillfully.

This sentence will be OK to switch the position of the day. Take a look at the results: I will never forget the day when I met you

I won't forget the day I met you. The day acts as a antecedent, and when guides the predetermined clause to modify and qualify the day.

The day at the end of this sentence was added incorrectly and should be deleted.

Yes. Or say.

i will never be married to you.

Or say I will never marry you

This is a special use of marry. It can be a transitive verb or a verb with a double object.

Yes, omit to, because marry is a transitive verb.

The sentence appears with two predicates, think and is, with grammatical errors. It can be changed to a clause form, and of can be changed to that

When American families celebrate Christmas, the main customs are to put gifts in socks, hang them on Christmas trees, eat turkey on Christmas Eve, and hold family dances in crowded families.

Americans have a strong emphasis on family at Christmas, putting gifts on trees and stockings, eating turkey on Christmas Eve (Christmas Eve), and having a family dance.

There are grammatical errors, where is the Chinese of the sentence???