Help!!! English grammar!?

Question

Hi, I am a student having trouble studying English grammar.
I found a strange sentence, at least for me,reading a news paper saying "Germany praise Bush on global warming."

Doesn't it have to be "FOR" instead of "ON"?
"Germany praise Bush for global warming"

What is difference between
and ?
I am waiting for someone to let me be clear with this.

and..

They ruled out Beckham's playing again for England.
They ruled out going back on their previous decision.

Are these two sentences correct in temrs of grammar?

Please feel free to point out any mistakes if I've made on this page.
Thank you for reading!!

Answer 1

It would be "for" if Germany was impressed with Bush for having caused global warming.

With "on" it's semantically correct but grammatically a bit too much of a shortcut. (But that's fine for most newspapers.) Praise should always go with for, but "for doing something" or "for something [that the person did]". To be absolutely correct they'd need "Germany praise Bush for his efforts to stop global warming." Too wordy for a newspaper!

The two "ruled out" sentences are fine. In the first case, "they" aren't "Beckham" so you have to say who's doing the playing. In the second case "they" did both the ruling out AND the going back, so you don't need a "subject". Note that it's not really a subject but a possessive. Gerunds act as nouns rather than verbs, so they have possessors rather than subjects.

Answer 2

In this sentence, the word "praise" is a noun, otherwise it should have read "Germany praises Bush on global warming." And Germany couldn't very well praise Bush for global warming, since there is nothing praiseworthy in causing it. The implication in the sentence, though not expressed, is that Germany praised Bush on efforts to reduce global warming, although I myself don't see him doing anything of the sort.
And yes, the two last sentences containing the phrase "ruled out" are grammatically correct. There is nothing wrong with them.

Answer 3

First of all, judging from what you've typed, you speak EXCELLENT English. Second, English is one f%*#ked up language, it gets hard for fluent speakers.

Sentence one: This sentence CAN make sense, but judging from its context, I don't think it does. The only way it is proper English is if "to praise" is in the imperative (command) form. The sentece should read "Germany praises Bush for global warming." When you praise something, you do use for, not on. On can work, but is very awkward. Either way, Germany does NOT praise Bush, they hate him. . . Maybe praise is meant to be a different verb?

Sentence two: Beckham's playing is a noun (playing is a gerund). Subject: They, Main Verb: ruled. If you add it up, the sentece makes sense. They are trying to say that Beckham won't be playing for England again, they ruled it out.

Sentence three: The same logic applies to this sentence as to sentence two.

I'm sorry if this isn't helpful enough, and good luck with the English. It's one hell of a language. . .

Answer 4

Hi, I am a student who having some difficulties with English Grammar.

I found a strange sentence on the news paper reading "Germany praise Bush on global warming."

Is not have to be "FOR" instead of "ON" ?
"Germany praise Bush for global warming"

What is the difference between and ?
I am waiting someone to clear my doubt.

and

They ruled out that Beckham is playing again for England.
They ruled out that not going to take on their previous decision.

Are these two sentences correct , in terms of grammar ?

Please feel free to point any mistakes if I'd made.

Thank for reading.

Answer 5

No, "On" is correct. The issue is about global warming. So they wrote that owing to the need for compact headlines. The long of it as they say is, as an example would theoretically be, is that Germany praises Bush on issues or resolutions passed on Global warming.

If you use "For" it would connote a different meaning. It would mean Germany is praising Bush for Global Warming? meaning Bush caused something to further global warming and he is being praised for it.

Ex. Headline -"Farmers thank God for rain." and not "Farmers thank WTO on less subsidies." the former meaning the residents were thanking God for raining over their farms, while the latter thanks the WTO on issues pertaining to lesser subsidies. got it?

The two sentences are correct.

Answer 6

I believe that the word 'on' was used because the sentence is a short form of "Germany praise(s) Bush on the issue of global warming"

If they were to use 'for', it would imply that Germany is praising Bush for creating or allowing global warming! (a bad thing!)