grammaticality - Can I end a sentence with "on"?

Does this sentence make sense "I would like to propose forming a partnership where we work together to provide optimal service to the new developments you are building, or have already started construction on."

word choice - "How far" vs "How long"

I am not clear how to use "How long" and "How far". Suppose I got in a taxi or cab to my hotel, how should I say to the driver if I want to know the distance to the hotel? Which of the following is correct?

How far is it to the hotel?

How long is it to the hotel?

Then,if I need to know the time it will take to the hotel, may I say:

How long is it to the hotel?

Or are there any other more appropriate expressions for the above two scenarios?

verbs - "To hear" or "to hearing"?

I often see constructions like this one:

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

It seems a little strange to me. In my mind it would look better using the infinitive form "to hear". I don't know if it has something with the verbals... Anyway, what I want to know is which form is correct and why?

Answer

This is not an infinitive. "Hearing from you soon" is a gerund, which functions as a noun.

I look forward to [hearing from you soon].

is the same kind of construction as

I look forward to [my vacation].

meaning - "I care for you" versus "I care about you"

I would like to know if there is a semantic difference between I care for you and I care about you.

nouns - Word can be single or plural and is also possessive at the same time

I am trying to construct a sentence for a printed document that requires an odd usage of a noun that can be singular or plural but is also possessive.

Here is an example of a sentence that contains a noun that could be singular or plural and so both are listed:

Each person selects which task or tasks they would like to complete.

Some people would use task(s) instead of task or tasks. But this is a different issue. I tend to avoid this.

Suppose a related sentence now mentions something belonging to each task. Perhaps a single task is selected at random, we could say the following:

The random number generator decides which single task's requirements are fulfilled.

Here we talk about requirements belonging to one task. But if there is more than one task then we would need to move the apostrophe to after the s. Right?

The list of two or more random numbers decides which tasks' requirements are fulfilled.

Now here is my dilemma, I need to talk about a list of tasks that could contain a single item. Is it appropriate to use the plural?

The list of one or more random numbers decides which ?????? requirements are fulfilled.

I'd like to avoid using something like the following which appears to me as if it is technically correct but sounds wrong:

The list of one or more random numbers decides which task's or tasks' requirements are fulfilled.

Answer

I think you should just use the plural which tasks'. Using a plural doesn't always mean that there will be more than one of the item. It's often used when this is just a possibility. For instance, if you said

We'll give out prizes to all the people who show up.

you would not be considered incorrect if only one person shows up (at least not grammatically -- you might still have a marketing problem).

In your case, since you specify one of more at the beginning, and that these correspond directly to the tasks, it's clear that the number of tasks can be one of more.

Felicitous use of the definite article with the referent being familiar within the discourse (to the hearer?)

Quick questions:

(1) The referent of the NP be either familiar within the discourse ... --- Why does it have to be 'within the discourse'? Can't it be familiar outside the discourse? I mean, what are the authors saying here? I'm confused. Does it matter whether it is familiar within the discourse or anywhere?

(2) Are the authors saying 'the referent of the NP be either familiar within the discourse to the hearer? (Yes, right?)

Research into the meaning of the English definite article has

generally been approached from one of two perspectives,
characterizable as 'familiarity' and 'uniqueness.' That is, felicitous
use of the definite article has been argued to require that the
referent of the NP be either familiar within the discourse or
uniquely identifiable to the hearer. The vast majority of uses can be
accounted for under either view, since an entity typically must be
familiar in a given discourse in order to be identifiable to the
hearer.

*NP: noun phrase, i.e. a noun with modifiers, or just a bare noun. (This annotation is added by Sssamy)

('Uniqueness, Familiarity, and the Definite Article in English' by
Betty Birner and Gregory Ward)

What are verbs specific to living subjects called?

The set of verbs applicable to living organisms can also apply to other inanimate subjects like rain forests (e.g. resembled, looked) but I'd like to identify those verbs which are strictly applicable to living organisms.

Perhaps this is a better representation:

While it's possible for a forest to speak figuratively, I only want to focus on the literal use of these verbs. I want to identify the organism verbs, including human verbs. Oh, and deceased subjects that were once living should also be considered as organisms.

Answer

I don't believe such a distinction can be drawn; anything can be personified to use any verb, at least metaphorically.

The sun can smile upon a child's summer day. Necessity can mother invention. Trees converse whenever the wind blows. The old mountain can swallow the inexperienced.