<p>As I spent time with my family, I was astonished at how different life can be in a foreign country. Many of the assets we consider as bare necessities need to be earned in this country. </p>
<p>I’m confused if ‘need’ should be ‘needed.’ Help?</p>
<p>Without context to the contrary, “need” seems fine.</p>
<p>Their exuberant smiles in such harsh conditions were quite possibly the pinnacle of my trip.
Is this ok too?
(Sorry I’m asking such random questions…)</p>
<p>It looks fine also.</p>
<p>For some reason I think the first one should be needed, not positive though. </p>
<p>Second one looks fine.</p>
<p>“For some reason I think the first one should be needed, not positive though.”</p>
<p>Why would it be wrong as it is? The need presumably continues to the present.</p>
<p>Need is ok in the first one.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure the second one is wrong.</p>
<p>Their smiles … were … the pinnacle</p>
<p>Pinnacle is singular, were/smiles is plural.</p>
<p>…So I should change it? Getting mixed reviews… So pinnacles is best? It sounds kinda odd…</p>
<p>Yes, it does sound odd, but it’s grammatically correct. What are the other underlined words though? There might be a better one to change that makes it right but not odd-sounding.</p>
<p>The first one is “need” because the rest of the sentence is present tense. The second one is “pinnacles” because smiles is plural.</p>
<p>“pinnacle” is correct as singular. The smiles collectively emerged as a pinnacle; each one didn’t have to be a pinnacle. In fact, by definition there can’t be more than one pinnacle in a system.</p>
<p>If it said that they “collectively emerged as a pinnacle”, that would be fine. But that’s not what it says.</p>
<p>The best way to say the sentence and to get the idiom right would be “Seeing their exuberant smiles in such harsh conditions was quite possibly the pinnacle of my trip”. But in context, changing pinnacle to pinnacles does work.</p>
<p>John and Mike were the leader
The dogs were the champion
“To Kill a Mockingbird” and “Macbeth” were the pinnacle of writing.</p>
<p>It simply doesn’t work.</p>
<p>“Bob, Mike, and Sue are my family.”</p>
<p>Family in that instance is actually plural. Family is interchangeable with “family members” in such cases.</p>
<p>But if you did this:</p>
<p>“Bob, Mike, and Sue are the family”</p>
<p>Now we’ve got an issue, because family can’t exist as a plural word within that syntax.</p>
<p>How do you counter my argument that, by definition, only one pinnacle is possible within a system?</p>
<p>By reminding you that the rules of English take precedence over the rules of math on the writing portion of the exam.</p>
<p>The definition of a word is under the purview of English.</p>
<p>Yes, and it has more definitions than the mathematical one which precludes the possibility of multiple pinnacles. A pinnacle can be just a high point among many.</p>
<p>I can’t find a definition from a respectable source that supports that idea.</p>
<p>Their exuberant smiles in such harsh conditions were quite possibly the pinnacle of my trip.</p>
<p>Essentially the sentence is flawed. </p>
<p>1.Regardless of many highs and lows one can have one’s life and math ,the author of this sentence implies THE highest point. Else he would have used “one of the blahblah…”.
2. This leads to the conclusion that “smiles” need to be collective singular.
3. Then you need was instead of were.</p>
<p>Their exuberant smiles in such harsh conditions was quite possibly the pinnacle of my trip.
would corect the sentence without moving away from the author’s intent.</p>
<p>Now a collective noun acting as singular vs plural. It is derived from the meaning sometimes.</p>
<p>My family has been very supportive … (singular).
My family are arriving at diferent times (plural).</p>