Vocabulary
KERMIT - THE FROG
ANKLES
SNEAKERS
SHOELACES
SWINGS
Phoebe: I have to tie my shoe, so you go ahead, I'll catch up.
Rachel: Okay.
Phoebe: Okay. Come on! That's not running! Let's go!
Rachel: You guys, I'm telling you, when she runs, she looks like a cross between Kermit The Frog and The Six Million Dollar Man.
Monica: So, Phoebe runs weird huh?Rachel: Yeah, yeah and you know what, I know she's gonna wanna run again, I just don't know how to get out of it, I mean, I live with her.
Monica: Why don't you just be straight with her? Tell her the truth.
Ross: Yeah.
Rachel: You're right, you're right. I should just tell her the truth.
Phoebe: Hey!
Ross: Hey!
Rachel: Pheebs, Monica tripped me, I don't think I can ever run again, ever!
Phoebe: Why? Why would you do that?
Monica: I don't know. Rachel I'm-I'm sorry that I hurt your ankles.
Rachel: Ankle.
Monica: We'll see.
Phoebe: Hi! Oh yeah, uh-huh, it's me. I saw you grab your running shoes this morning and sneak out. You lied so you could run by yourself.
Rachel: No, no Phoebe no, I was...no. You know what, I was, I was actually just checking to, see, if I could run. And I can!
Phoebe: Please Rachel, I am not an idiot.
Rachel: No, wait Phoebe.
Rachel: Hey Phoebe, can I talk to you for a second?
Phoebe: Sure
Rachel: Okay, um, I... All right Phoebe look, I just wanted to say that I'm sorry. OK? I handled the situation horribly and I should not have lied to you.
Phoebe: So, what should you have done?
Rachel: Well, I-I should've told you the truth.
Phoebe: Uh-Huh, Which is...?
Rachel: Well, y'know, the reason I didn't wanna go running with you is because um, well y'know the way that you run is a little...(Starts flapping her arms)
Phoebe: So?
Rachel: Well, it's embarrassing. People were looking at us like we were crazy.
Phoebe: Why do you care?
Rachel: Because they're people.
Phoebe: But people that you don't know and will never see again.
Rachel: Yes, but still. They're people…with eyes.
Phoebe: Well, I didn't get embarrassed running next to Miss (panting). But no, okay. No, no, I can see why running with me would be embarrassing to you. Yeah, okay. You're uptight.
Rachel: I-I am not uptight—Hey-hey-hey-oh-oh! Listen, I am not uptight, man.
Phoebe: That's okay Rachel. I'm not judging you; that's just who you are. Me. I'm more free y'know? I run like I did when I was a kid, cause that's the only way it's fun. Y'know, I mean didn’t you ever run so fast you thought your legs were gonna fall off? Y'know, like when you were like running towards the swings or running away from Satan? The neighbor's dog.
The Six Million Dollar Man is an American television series about a former astronaut with bionic implants working for a fictional government office known as OSI. The series is based on the Martin Caidin novel Cyborg, which was the series's proposed title during pre-production. Following three television movies aired in 1973, The Six Million Dollar Man aired on the ABC network as a regular series for five seasons from 1974 to 1978. The title role of Steve Austin was played by Lee Majors, who subsequently became a pop culture icon of the 1970s. A spin-off series, The Bionic Woman, ran from 1976 to 1978 (and, in turn, was the subject of a remake in 2007). Three television movies featuring both eponymous characters were also produced between 1987 and 1994.
Grammar
A suffix is a letter or group of letters that is added to the end of a word in order to make another word. For example, if we add the suffix -ly to the adjective apparent, we'll have another word - the adverb apparently.
Learning how to recognize certain suffixes, their usual meaning, and how they change the meanings of words might be of great help when you read an English word you're not familiar with. If you understand the way the word is formed, it will be easier for you to find it in the dictionary.
Let's look at this example with the word horribly, which you learned in this lesson:
"I handled the situation horribly and I should not have lied to you."
Let's say you don't remember the meaning of horribly, so you look for it in the dictionary. If you discover that you can only find it in the same entry for the word horrible (horribly without the suffix -ly) but without a definition, then you should do the following:
--> Read the meaning of the word horrible (bad, unpleasant);
--> put this meaning in the following structure:
Should Have + Past Participle
Do you think Barry should have taken Lilly to the office last week?
Could Have + Past Participle
This construction can also be used to talk about past events which are not certain to have happened (like may/might have). See the example below:
-Who sent those flowers?
-I'm not sure. It could have been your mother.
Must have + past participle
Grammar
A suffix is a letter or group of letters that is added to the end of a word in order to make another word. For example, if we add the suffix -ly to the adjective apparent, we'll have another word - the adverb apparently.
Learning how to recognize certain suffixes, their usual meaning, and how they change the meanings of words might be of great help when you read an English word you're not familiar with. If you understand the way the word is formed, it will be easier for you to find it in the dictionary.
Let's look at this example with the word horribly, which you learned in this lesson:
"I handled the situation horribly and I should not have lied to you."
Let's say you don't remember the meaning of horribly, so you look for it in the dictionary. If you discover that you can only find it in the same entry for the word horrible (horribly without the suffix -ly) but without a definition, then you should do the following:
--> Read the meaning of the word horrible (bad, unpleasant);
--> put this meaning in the following structure:
horribly: in a bad or unpleasant manner
horrible
So we understand that the suffix -ly added to the adjective horrible forms the adverb horribly which means in a clear or certain manner.
There are cases where -ly adverbs are also main-entry words because theu have different meanings of their related adjectives. This is the case with the word hardly. Compare these sentences.
I didn't sleep very well last night. My new mattress is too hard!
I hardly slept last night because I had a terrible headache.
Notice that the adjective hard is used to describe something that is very solid, and the adverb hardly is used to say that something happens to almost no degree, or almost doesn't happen.
In general, the suffix -ly is an adverb-forming suffix meaning in the manner of.
The suffix -ly can also be added to the end of nouns to form adjectives.
ex: friend + ly = friendly
Alex has a very friendly smile.
There are cases where -ly adverbs are also main-entry words because theu have different meanings of their related adjectives. This is the case with the word hardly. Compare these sentences.
I didn't sleep very well last night. My new mattress is too hard!
I hardly slept last night because I had a terrible headache.
Notice that the adjective hard is used to describe something that is very solid, and the adverb hardly is used to say that something happens to almost no degree, or almost doesn't happen.
In general, the suffix -ly is an adverb-forming suffix meaning in the manner of.
The suffix -ly can also be added to the end of nouns to form adjectives.
ex: friend + ly = friendly
Alex has a very friendly smile.
Should Have + Past Participle
We use
should have + past participle to talk about things we regret.
I got
really wet walking home last night, I should
have taken an umbrella.
The speaker
did not take an umbrella when he/she went out last night so he/she got wet. He/She
regrets that he/she did not take his/her umbrella.
Regret
(verb/noun) is to feel sorry about something that happened or did not happen in
the past.
I should have called you sooner.
You should have spoken to me before
deciding.
Sarah
talked all the way through the movie. I should
not have invited her to the cinema.
I'm really
tired today. I should not have stayed
awake so late last night.
I shouldn't have shouted at her.
Should we have told Mom and Dad about what happened at the party?Do you think Barry should have taken Lilly to the office last week?
Could Have + Past Participle
We
use “could have + participle” to talk about a possibility (that didn’t happen)
in the past. It can be used in the affirmative, negative or the interrogative
forms. See the example below:
I could have broken my leg
in the accident.
It was possible for the speaker to break his/her leg in the accident, but he/she didn't, his/her leg is ok.
More examples:
He could have been Prime Minister now if he hadn't decided to leave politics.
We could have spent today at the seaside, but we thought it was going to rain, so we decided not to.
This construction can also be used to talk about past events which are not certain to have happened (like may/might have). See the example below:
-Who sent those flowers?
-I'm not sure. It could have been your mother.
May / might + have + past participle
The
structure may / might + perfect infinitive is used to talk about the
possibility that something happened in the past. It could also be used to say
that something was true in the past.
Ann hasn’t
arrived yet. She may have missed the train. (It is possible that she missed
the train.)
What was
that noise? It might have been an airplane.
The
structure might + perfect infinitive is also used to talk about past events or
situations that were possible but did not happen.
You were
stupid to fight with him. He might have killed you. (It was possible but
fortunately it didn’t happen.)
May is not
normally used to express this idea although it is sometimes possible in British
English.
You were
stupid to fight with him. He may have killed you. (Possible, but not very
common)
The
structure may / might + perfect infinitive can also be used to refer to the
present or future. In this case, may and might show possibility.
Compare:
By the end
of this month, I may have finished this work. (Strong possibility)
By the end
of this month, I might have finished this work. (Weak possibility)
By the end
of this month, I will have finished this work. (Certainty)
Must have + past participle shows a great deal of certainty that something happened, but there is still some doubt in the speaker’s mind. He/she is not 100% certain. For example:
The students did well on the test. They must have studied hard.
(There are other possible reasons why the students did well on the test. It might have been very easy, or they might have already learned the material. The speaker uses must have studied hard to show that he/she thinks this is the most logical reason they did so well.) For example:
I’ve phoned Jim several times, but he doesn’t answer. He must have gone out.
More examples:
Someone
must have been seeing the car when the accident happened.
The
sidewalks are wet, it must have rained overnight.
It must
have been love but it's over now. (Roxette song)
He must
have drunk all the milk, there is none left!
He's not
answering the phone. He must have gone out.
Also, we
can use the continuous form:
She must
have been listening behind the door.
Someone
must have been seeing the car when the accident happened.
He must
have been doing something bad when the teacher saw him.
She must
not have been listening when the teacher said her name.
Relative Pronouns
A relative
pronoun is a pronoun that introduces a relative clause. It is called a
"relative" pronoun because it "relates" to the word that
its relative clause modifies. Here is an example:
- The person who phoned
me last night is my teacher.
In the above
example, "who":
- relates to "The person", which
"who phoned me last night" modifies
- introduces the relative clause "who
phoned me last night"
There are five
relative pronouns: who, whom, whose, which, that*
Who (subject) and whom (object)
are generally only for people. Whose is for possession. Which is
for things. That can be used for things and people
only in defining relative clauses (clauses that are essential
to the sentence and do not simply add extra information).**
Relative pronouns can refer
to singular or plural, and there is no difference between male and female.
Look at these
examples showing defining and non-defining relative clauses:
example sentences
S=subject, O=object, P=possessive |
notes
|
||
defining relative clauses
|
S
|
- The
person who phoned me last night is my teacher.
- The person that phoned me last night is my teacher. |
"that" is preferable
|
- The
car which hit me was yellow.
- The car that hit me was yellow. |
"that" is preferable
|
||
O
|
- The
person whom I phoned last night is my teacher.
- The people who I phoned last night are my teachers. - The person that I phoned last night is my teacher. - The person I phoned last night is my teacher. |
"whom"
is correct but formal
relative pronoun is optional |
|
- The
car which I drive is old.
- The car that I drive is old. - The car I drive is old. |
"that"
is preferable to "which"
relative pronoun is optional |
||
P
|
- The
student whose phone just rang should stand up.
- Students whose parents are wealthy pay extra. |
||
- The
police are looking for the car whose driver was masked.
- The police are looking for the car of which the driver was masked. |
"whose"
can be used with things
"of which" is also possible |
||
non-defining relative clauses
|
S
|
- Mrs
Pratt, who is very kind, is my teacher.
|
|
- The
car, which was a taxi, exploded.
- The cars, which were taxis, exploded. |
|||
O
|
- Mrs
Pratt, whom I like very much, is my teacher.
- Mrs Pratt, who I like very much, is my teacher. |
"whom"
is correct but formal
"who" is common in spoken English and informal written English |
|
- The
car, which I was driving at the time, suddenly caught fire.
|
|||
P
|
- My
brother, whose phone you just heard, is a doctor.
|
||
- The
car, whose driver jumped out just before the accident, was
completely destroyed.
- The car, the driver of which jumped out just before the accident, was completely destroyed. |
"whose"
can be used with things
"of which" is also possible |
||
*Not
all grammar sources count "that" as a relative pronoun.
**Some people claim that we should not use "that" for people but must use "who/whom". There is no good reason for such a claim; there is a long history of "that" for people in defining relative clauses.
**Some people claim that we should not use "that" for people but must use "who/whom". There is no good reason for such a claim; there is a long history of "that" for people in defining relative clauses.
