Feeling angry: Is this grammar correct?

As follows: It should be said that feeling angry.

die syntax explanation die from, die of, die with, die by 1die from (gunshot) wounds, weakness, overwork, overeating, etc. Such as:

the engineer died from overwork.The engineer died of overwork. the child died from weakness.

The child died because he was too weak. 2.die of of sickness, hunger, cold, old age, etc.; Died of sorrow, lovelorn and other spiritual factors.

For example: the man died of lung-cancer. The man died of lung cancer.

the beggar died of hunger and cold.This beggar died of hunger and cold. 3.

die with means dying of some mental factor. e.g. the old woman died with anger (horror).

The old woman was furious to death. She died with Grief (deep sorrow).She died of grief.

4.die by means to die of violence, etc. Such as:

the young girl died by her own hand.The young girl committed suicide and died. 5.

die for means " for .....and die".

Perfectly in line with Chinese and English grammar, very angry = it's at the top angry.

To be angry is to be very angry. Very angry, just very, very angry. But it doesn't feel too smooth. I think it's okay to be angry, you don't need to be very angry. Hehehehehe!

Shocking: Seeing something serious and feeling shocked.

You say that"It's shocking"It is equivalent to "making people feel shocked when they see something serious." This sentence has a faint language disease.

In the process of use, it can be "noun" + shocking.

The shocking grammatical of bai is correct du, and the subject is.

The object of the action is the object of the action. Expert.

Grammar is a branch of linguistics that studies the classes of speech used in definite usage, the inflection of words or other means of expressing interrelationships, and the functions and relationships of words in sentences. Contains the rules of word formation, formation, and sentence formation. Grammar has two meanings, one refers to the law of grammatical structure itself, that is, the grammatical fact.

Grammar is the science of exploring and describing grammatical structures, and it is the understanding and explanation of objectively existing grammatical systems by grammarians. There is no disagreement in the grammatical facts themselves, but there are disagreements in the grammatical system due to the inconsistencies in the materials, perspectives, and analytical methods possessed by grammarians. Grammar consists of two parts: lexical and syntactic.

Lexical grammar mainly refers to the formation, variation and classification of words. Syntax mainly refers to the rules of formation and variation of grammatical units such as phrases and sentences.

1. "Order."

People are shocked" is a conjunctive sentence.

Self-styled structure. "Order" is a predicate; "People" is both the object of "order" and the subject of "shocking"; "Shocking" is an adjective juxtaposition of two verb-object structures that act as a predicate.

2. It may be understood in this way:

It's a sick sentence, and the subject-verb collocation is inappropriate. Revise the words "shocking". ”

1.First, let's take a look at what "shocking" actually means

Shocking. Interpretation Seeing something serious and feeling shocked.

2.From the above explanation, it is not difficult for us to see:

1) "Shocking" is a feeling emanating from the human heart, and it is a sensory verb.

2) "Shocking" is actually used in the same way as "shocked," "surprised," and other psychological descriptors.

3) So the grammar of "shocking" is correct.

3.Regarding what the landlord said: "Another example, incomprehensible, refers to people incomprehensible, confusing, refers to people confusing, "shocking", just ask, whose eyes and hearts are this person going to touch? "On the question of the landlord, I think:

"Shocking" touches the author's eyes, and it is also the author's heart that is shocked, first of all, when he sees a certain scene or phenomenon, and then he will say that it is shocking, and its usage is actually the same as "incomprehensible" and "doubtful".

4."But the key is in the back, comrade: we are discussing shocking usage, I explained it very clearly before, it is okay to make people "incomprehensible", it is okay to make people "disappointed", but shocking is not a human action!

How can you say "human"? "This question of the landlord, let me explain:

The landlord has this question, I think it's really thought-provoking, but if you think about it carefully, you should understand that in fact, the word shocking is not a human action, but a human feeling, an inner feeling, (not a human operation, pay attention, this is the key) If the landlord carefully understands the original meaning of the idiom "shocking", he will agree with me. So the key is the shocking part of speech, if you know its meaning and part of speech, there will be no misunderstanding.

It seems that the landlord has a misunderstanding.

The syntax of the shocking "" is correct.

Shocking means that I saw a certain scene inside, and I was very shocked.

To touch the eye is to be seen, to touch, to touch, to enter.

This sentence must appear after or before a comma, or a statement describing something or a scene.

It can be said that "the scene of the car accident just now is shocking." ”

It can also be said that "it is shocking that the house is in shambles, and the door of the safe is open." ”

The "shocking" of these two sentences has a fixed object, that is, "the scene of the car accident" and "the scene of the wolf".

And there are no fixed objects, and the "shocking" of scenes and other objects is a language problem.

The landlord was shocked.

There is a deviation in the understanding of the original word, presumably bai you see this word as a juxtaposed phrase, the correct meaning should be dao should be "frightened by the eye touch", that is, there is "eye touch" first, and then there is "heart frightened".

In addition, the landlord's understanding of the "touch" of "touching the eye" is also not correct, and the meaning of "touch" here is the active meaning, that is, the action made by the owner of the "eye", rather than the passive action of the "eye" itself.

The whole word is "shocked" in layman's terms, and it should be interpreted as "seeing a serious situation and feeling shocked in the heart", rather than "a certain situation makes people's eyes and hearts feel like it".

"Shocking" is of course grammatically correct.

Ling Kezuo said that this sentence was smooth, so his grammar was correct.

Ling is equivalent to a verb, a person is equivalent to a name, and a shocking adjective.

Shocking: Seeing bai things or and happening du things, far from thinking about it, and dao is afraid and sad things to see and answer things, so that the heart feels scared. Whose eyes are it touching, whose heart is it shocking?

Shockingly, generally speaking, the subject is the thing, the person is not the subject.

This is the law of correspondence between subject, predicate, and object of the sentence.

Interpretation Eye-catching: Seeing with the eyes; Shock: Shocked. I was shocked to see something serious. Describe the seriousness of the situation and cause shock.

It's shocking, so to speak, and there are no problems with the grammar.

For example: the tragic scene shocked xx. is the version of the tragic scene touching the power.

The eyes of the moving xx alarmed the heart of the xx.

Generally speaking, it is shocking, and it generally refers to something or a scene that touches the eyes of "people" and shocks the hearts of "people".

The landlord may wish to take a look at the shocking explanation of the idiom and an example in "Mirror Flowers", the "teaching" in the example is similar to "order", "make", "let", etc.

Idiom entry: shocking.

Idiom pronunciation: chù mù jīng xīn

Idiom Explanation: Seeing some kind of serious situation, the heart is shocked.

Idiom source: Tang Hanyu "Chang Li Ji Mr. Zhenyao Epitaph": "And it is a poem, and it is heartfelt." ”

Idiom example: And because his surname is Chi, I am afraid that if there is red dysentery and blood hemorrhoids in the toilet, I can teach him to clean it often: so I sent him. (Qing Li Ruzhen's "Mirror Flowers" 99th chapter).

where represents this entry: shocking).

Shocking: Seeing things or happening, far from what you think, is fear and sadness of seeing things, making you feel scared in your heart. Whose eyes are it touching, whose heart is it shocking?

Shocking is right.

Touching the eyes ( chù mù jīng xīn ) Interpretation Touching eyes: the eyes see; Shock: Shocked. I was shocked to see something serious inside. Describe the seriousness of the situation and cause shock.

Source: Qing Lin Zexu's "Notice on the Issuance of New Regulations on the Punishment of Smoking Punishment": "You should be even more shocking, if you wait and see the postponement and defy the law, it is your own sin, and you will die innocently, and it is not too early to say."

Usage: Linked; as a predicate, a definite; Qu Qiubai's "Chronicles of the Hungry Country" VII: "The road we took from Mukden to Harbin was full of traces of the Japanese aggressive policy.

Don't forget, the word "order" is the meaning of let, ** things are shocking, very in line with grammar.

The subject, this sentence (or rather, this phrase) is omitted

It will not appear alone, the premise will appear xx things, and then follow this sentence where the subject is the xx thing mentioned earlier. If this sentence appears on its own, it is an unquestionable sick sentence.

It should be possible.

Because the thing or event is the subject, the order is the predicate, the person is the conjunctive, and the shocking is the object of the person, and it is grammatically universal.

The eyes and heart are the eyes and the heart of the person.

Shockingly, generally speaking, the subject is the thing, the person is not the subject.

This is the law of correspondence between subject, predicate, and object of the sentence.

I don't think it's right, because the subject is shocking, and the word itself contains the subject, so I added it"Impressive"It's repeated.

The subject is the default. The predicate is complete.

Very much in favor of hugging the Lord. Similarly, there is also a "deterrent" military force.

The grammar of Chinese is very subtle, and the two words you say can be understood as verbal usage.

""Shocking" is the conjunctive structure is right.

All life, life is bumpy, there are always joys and sorrows, there are also happiness and pain, there is no smooth sailing, people who can't think about it, they will lose their temper, get angry, be in a bad mood, and their lives will not be happy.

Writer Yang Daxia said that being angry is stupid.

This sentence is a sick sentence.

It feels like everything that follows is an object. It is simplified to "the reason why I am hurt is because of myself".

And "the reason for the hurt is because of yourself" also has problems, and is guilty of repeating the problem.

It should be said that "the reason for the injury is oneself".

But "the reason for the injury is oneself" is also incomplete, and an object is missing after it. "The reason is oneself".

For example, "the reason for being hurt is that you are reckless", or "the reason you are hurt is because you are careless", etc.

Wrong. It's a mixture of sentences. You can just remove it.

No, the fault lies in the cause and because it is repeated.

No, it's a mixture.

The reason for what is ......

What is what is because....

Not the feeling of the reason is not a match.

Words should would could are auxiliary verbs in their own right, and when used in a euphemistic mood, words such as shall will can are relatively tougher.

You're here in a euphemistic tone.,There's no problem with the grammar of shall.,But the tone feels like you're ordering others.,Should also has a bit of a sense of asking for others' consent.。

should is a modal verb that means "how it should be". Modal verbs are followed by verb archetypes.