Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds. Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds.

or: …about the infinitive and the gerund

Today, I’d like to talk about the infinitive and the gerund. Today, I’d like to talk about the infinitive and the gerund.

Or, "the infinitive and gerund tenses".

Today, I’d like to talk about the infinitive and gerund. Today, I’d like to talk about the infinitive and gerund.

Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds. Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds.

Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds. Today, I’d like to talk about infinitives and gerunds.

Now, we are at thea gate. Now, we are at a gate.

Now, we are at thea gate. Now, we are at a gate.

It is better to use indefinite articles (a, an) the first time something is mentioned. Afterwards, you can use the definite article to refer to the thing (the, that, etc). "We came across a gate. The gate was wide open. Later, we walked down a path. The path was narrow."

Now, we aWe're at the gate. We're at the gate.

This sounds more natural.

Now, we arThe following scene involves two people at thea gate. The following scene involves two people at a gate.

This is more natural in the US.

Now, we are at thea gate. Now, we are at a gate.

He saidys, “I forgot to lock the door!” He says, “I forgot to lock the door!”

You need to choose either past tense or present and stick with it. I have chosen present, since it’s what you started with.

He(Describe the individual) said, “I forgot to lock the door!” (Describe the individual) said, “I forgot to lock the door!”

Who is he? When you use a pronoun for a person not yet introduced, it makes it unclear who you are referring to. Always describe the person before using a third-person pronoun. The reason why "we" is okay is because it is the first-person plural. You know who the first-person is (you), so no need to describe the other people described by "we." But since it switches to third-person (he), you need to describe that individual first. Infinitive here is good!

Then he rushed tos (back) to the entrance. Then he rushes (back) to the entrance.

Then he rushed to the entrance. Then he rushed to the entrance.

Then He then rushed to entrance. He then rushed to entrance.

The other way is grammatically correct; however, this way sounds more natural to me.

Then he rushed to the entrance. Then he rushed to the entrance.

Then he rushed to the entrance. Then he rushed to the entrance.

Now, "he" is okay to use here because you have described the individual in the previous sentence. I'm not sure if this was meant to be an infinitive, but infinitive would need "to" to be before "rush." "He then went to rush the entrance."

(He is thinkings the door is not locked at this moment, right? ) (He thinks the door is not locked at this moment, right? )

(He is thinking the door is unot locked at this moment, right? ) (He is thinking the door is unlocked at this moment, right? )

(He is thinkings the door is not locked at thise moment, right? ) (He thinks the door is not locked at the moment, right? )

It's not necessary to include comments like this. I would just omit them.

(He is thinkingthinks that the door ismay not be locked at this moment, right? .) (He thinks that the door may not be locked at this moment.)

The "right" at the end makes the sentence a bit odd. It's more of a converstional thing to add a "right" at the end like this. For example: "I swear the professor said the midterm would be tomorrow, right?" But here, that wouldn't really fit the tone, so I used "may not" to show that doubt that "right" produces. Gerunds are using "-ing" verbs as nouns. Right now, you are using "think" in the "-ing" form as the present tense and not as a gerund. I can't figure out a natural way to write this sentence using the gerund, but here's my best shot: "His thinking is that the door may not have been locked at this moment."

After a while he caomes back and saidys, After a while he comes back and says,

After a while he came back and said, After a while he came back and said,

After a while, he came back and said, After a while, he came back and said,

After a while, he came back and said, “I forgot that I locked the door.” After a while, he came back and said, “I forgot that I locked the door.”

This sentence was a fragment so I added the next line to complete the sentence.

After a while, he came back and said, After a while, he came back and said,

“I forgot I had locked the door.” or: “I don’t/didn’t remember locking the door.” “I forgot I had locked the door.” or: “I don’t/didn’t remember locking the door.”

“Don’t remember locking” is OK, but “forgot locking” is not.

“I forgot to locking the door.” “I forgot to lock the door.”

“I forgot about locking the door.” “I forgot about locking the door.”

This sentence is grammatically correct, but only if you add "about" before "locking".

“I forgot locking the door.”

I deleted this and appended it to previous line.

“I forgot about locking the door.” “I forgot about locking the door.”

Gerund usage is good here!

It means the door was (already) locked when he backedgot back to the entrance. It means the door was (already) locked when he got back to the entrance.

“Backed to the entrance” means “drove (a car) backwards to the entrance.”

It means door was locked when he backedgot back from the entrance. It means door was locked when he got back from the entrance.

ItThis means the door was locked when he backedwent back to the entrance. This means the door was locked when he went back to the entrance.

It means the door was locked when he backed entrancechecked. It means the door was locked when he checked.

ItThis means that the door was locked when hewent back to thed entrance. This means that the door was locked when went back to the entrance.

So he forgot that he (had) locked the door. So he forgot that he (had) locked the door.

SoIn other words, he forgot that he locked the door. In other words, he forgot that he locked the door.

“I forgotdon’t remember locking the door.” “I don’t remember locking the door.”

“I forgot about locking the door.” “I forgot about locking the door.”

“I forgot about locking the door.” “I forgot about locking the door.”

“I forgot that I lockinged the door.” “I forgot that I locked the door.”

“I forgot about locking the door.” “I forgot about locking the door.”

IThe infinitive and gerund. The infinitive and gerund.

Infinitive and gerund.

I deleted this and added it to the next line.

Infinitives and gerunds: I’m not sure whether my understanding is correct or not. Infinitives and gerunds: I’m not sure whether my understanding is correct or not.

「Infinitive」というのは、「辞書形」という意味です。「Gerund」というのは、「(動詞) + の」ということです。Infinitive は動詞で、gerund は名詞です。

I’m not sure whether or not my understanding is correct or not. I’m not sure whether or not my understanding is correct.

Original is okay. I think this version sounds a bit more natural.

Is (using the) gerund natural for that sentence? Is (using the) gerund natural for that sentence?

Is gerund natural forin that sentence? Is gerund natural in that sentence?

Is a gerund natural for that sentence? Is a gerund natural for that sentence?

いいえ、自然ではありません。

Is the gerund natural forin that sentence? Is the gerund natural in that sentence?

Then…If not, how about this? If not, how about this?

Then… how about this? Then how about this?

Kingdom Baa vs Kingdom Moo. Kingdom Baa vs Kingdom Moo.

This is technically correct, but you seem to refer to each later on as individuals; therefore, I would change it to "King Baa vs King Moo".

_Kingdom Baa vs Kingdom Moo._ _Kingdom Baa vs Kingdom Moo_

Since this seems like a title, I removed the period and underlined it.

After settlements were agreed and the paper was on the table, just have done the signature of both leadersboth leaders have just signed the treaty. After settlements were agreed and the paper was on the table, both leaders have just signed the treaty.

The second part of this sentence doesn't quite work. I've suggested an alternative.

After settlements were agreed upon and the paper was on the table, just have done the signature ofhaving just been signed by both leaders.: After settlements were agreed upon and the paper was on the table, having just been signed by both leaders:

After settlements wereeverything was agreed upon and the paperdocument was on the table, just have doneonly the signatures of both leaders were needed. After everything was agreed upon and the document was on the table, only the signatures of both leaders were needed.

また、 After everything was agreed upon and the treaty was on the table, only the signatures of both leaders were needed.

After the settlements were agreed and the paper was on the table, just have dupon, both leaders sign the document one the signature of both leaderstable. After the settlements were agreed upon, both leaders sign the document on the table.

I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to express here, so I'll just give me best conjecture.

Kingdom Baa’s leader said, Kingdom Baa’s leader said,

Kingdom Baa’s leader said, Kingdom Baa’s leader said,

Kingdom Baa’s leader said, "Oh, no!" Kingdom Baa’s leader said, "Oh, no!"

Kingdom Baa’s leader said, Kingdom Baa’s leader said,

1. Omg!!"Oh my gosh!" "Oh my gosh!"

omg is very casual. It is usually only seen in text messages between friends or family.

1. Omg!!

"omg" is used in texting but not really in formal writing.

1. Omg!! 1. Omg!!

Try not to use "omg" outside of texting. It is not an abbreviation used outside of casual instances.

I forgot to stop/pause the atomic bomb buttocountdown! I forgot to stop the atomic bomb countdown!

I forgot to press the stop/pause button on the atomic bomb button! I forgot to press the stop/pause button on the atomic bomb!

This sentence didn't really make sense; however, I understood the general meaning.

1. I forgot to stop/pause the atomic bomb buttonlaunch! 1. I forgot to stop the atomic bomb launch!

I forgot to stop/pause the atomic bomb button! I forgot to stop/pause the atomic bomb!

In this case, is it still continuing to counting down? In this case, is it still continuing to count down?

In this case, still continuingWait, so it's still counting down? Wait, so it's still counting down?

In this case,s it still continuing the counting down? Is it still continuing the countdown?

また、 Is it still counting down?

In this case,You mean to say it's still continuing to counting down? You mean to say it's still continuing to count down?

2. Omgh, no! 2. Oh, no!

I forgot stoping/pausabout stopping the atomic bomb buttocountdown. I forgot about stopping the atomic bomb countdown.

I forgot stoping/pausingabout pressing the stop/pause button on the atomic bomb button. I forgot about pressing the stop/pause button on the atomic bomb.

I forgot to stoping/pausing the atomic bomb buttocountdown. I forgot to stop the atomic bomb countdown.

I forgot stoping/pausing the atomic bomb button. I forgot stoping/pausing the atomic bomb button.

I forgot about stopping/pausing the atomic bomb.

LThe leader asked the subordinate to stop the bomb and he whispered, “Boss, boss, you've already stopped it.” The leader asked the subordinate to stop the bomb and he whispered, “Boss, boss, you've already stopped it.”

"You've" sounds more natural here, but the other way was correct as well.

LA leader asked a subordinate to stop the bombcountdown and he whispered “Boss, bback, “Boss, you already stopped it.” A leader asked a subordinate to stop the countdown and he whispered back, “Boss, you already stopped it.”

LThe leader asked his/her subordinate to stop the bomb and the subordinate whispered, “Boss, boss, you already stopped it.” The leader asked his/her subordinate to stop the bomb and the subordinate whispered, “Boss, boss, you already stopped it.”

Since there is both the leader and subordinate here, it is unclear who "he" refers to. It can be inferred that it is the subordinate, but to be clear write "the subordinate whispered."

LThe leader said, “oOh! The leader said, “Oh!

LThe leader said, “oOh! The leader said, “Oh!

LThe leader saidexclaimed, “oOh! The leader exclaimed, “Oh!

You can use "exclaimed" instead of just "said" when there is "!" at the end. It makes dialogue seem less repetitive.

Did I?” And he would continued on with the second sentence, diwouldn’'t he? Did I?” And he would continue on with the second sentence, wouldn't he?

Did I?” AndThen he continueds with the second sentence, didoesn’t he? Did I?” Then he continues with the second sentence, doesn’t he?

Did I?” And he continued the second sentence, didn’t he? Did I?” And he continued the second sentence, didn’t he?

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean.

My understanding is first one is a dangerous situation. My understanding is first one is a dangerous situation.

My understanding is that the first oncase is a dangerous situation. My understanding is that the first case is a dangerous situation.

My understanding is that the first one is a dangerous situation. My understanding is that the first one is a dangerous situation.

SThe second oncase is like kingdom mthe one where King Moo might say “oh,Oh no, you scared me!!” And hahahaIt would be a humorous situation. The second case is the one where King Moo might say “Oh no, you scared me!!” It would be a humorous situation.

SThe second one is likwhere kKingdom mMoo might say, “oOh, no, you scared me!!” Aand hahahathen laughs at the situation. The second one is where Kingdom Moo might say, “Oh, no, you scared me!!” and then laughs at the situation.

SThe second one is lika situation where kKingdom mMoo might say's leader might exclaim, “oh, no, you scared me!!” And hahaha situation,” laughing all the while. The second one is a situation where Kingdom Moo's leader might exclaim, “oh no, you scared me,” laughing all the while.

Or… worst case is are both are still dangerous as countinuingg down is counting dowuing on? Or are both still dangerous as counting down is continuing on?

Or… the worst case is that both are still dangerous as continuingbecause it's still counting down? Or the worst case is that both are still dangerous because it's still counting down?

It doesn't matter whether a situation is dangerous when we're using infinitives or gerunds.

Or…, in the worst case iscenario, both are still dangerous as the bomb continuinges to counting down? Or, in the worst case scenario, both are still dangerous as the bomb continues to count down?

1. 止めるis not in the past. 1. 止めるis not in the past.

1止めるis not pastpresent tense. 1止めるis present tense.

AThe action havesn’t yet finished yet at this moment. The action hasn’t yet finished at this moment.

AThe action haven’tsn't been finished yet at this moment. The action hasn't been finished yet.

AThe action havesn’t finished yetbeen completed at thisat moment. The action hasn’t been completed at that moment.

AThe action haven’s not finished yet at this moment. The action has not finished yet at this moment.

SIt is still continuing to counting down. It is still continuing to count down.

StillThe countinuingg down is still counting downuing. The counting down is still continuing.

StillThe countinuingdown counting downues. The countdown continues.

Still continuing counting down. Still counting down.

2. 止めたis the past tense. 2. 止めたis the past tense.

2 (止めた) is past tense. 2 (止めた) is past tense.

AThe action have done already so nis already done; so no need to worriesy about the 爆弾. The action is already done; so no need to worry about the 爆弾.

AThe action have dones already so nbeen done so there's no need to worriesy about 爆弾. The action has already been done so there's no need to worry about 爆弾.

AThe action have dones already been done so no worries about a 爆弾. The action has already been done so no worries about a 爆弾.