This is the only mammal that can fly.   We were taught that an independent clause must have a complete thought/idea. How can "This is the only mammal" be treated as an independent clause?
We were taught that an independent clause must have a complete thought/idea.     This is the only mammal that can fly.     How can "This is the only mammal" be treated as an independent clause?            It was a grammar lesson and there was no context there. In this situation how can I decide that it is an independent clause? Though for sure, there should be an independent clause in a correct sentence, and the clause starting with 'that' is not independent. But by this way, I can't fit it with the rule that every independent clause must have a complete thought. A simple sentence must have an independent clause. If the sentence has no independent clause how we can call it a sentence? Can even two dependent clauses form a sentence?
I was recently in a bit of a quandary over which answer to accept to .  Of the answers I got, two were the clear leaders and, of course, I up-voted both. Choosing a 'winner' was more difficult though as their approaches were quite different.  Answer A addressed my question and provided a clear and well thought out response. I'd anticipate that this answer would be of most use to a user who found my question via a search. Selecting this would probably be the more community-focused way to go.  Answer B took a more lateral approach and made some guesses at the business logic behind my request, suggesting that I might be asking the wrong question. Their solution was based on this assumption - and they were spot on. Answer B formed the basis of my fix for the problem.  So... Best answer to the question or best solution to the problem - they may not always be the same thing.   I took the selfish approach and went with B. I'm not losing sleep over it, but I do wonder if I did the right thing? Possessive form of "one of [a list]"? If $\mathbf A$ and $\mathbf B$ are Hermitian, when does $\det(\mathbf A-\lambda\mathbf B)=0$ have only real roots? Let $\mathbf A, \mathbf B$ be Hermitian matrices of the same size. What is the characterization of $\mathbf A, \mathbf B$ such that $p(\lambda)=\det(\mathbf A-\lambda\mathbf B)=0$ has only real roots?   If $\mathbf B$ is positive definite (I corrected this), it is easy to see $p(\lambda)$ has only real roots. How do I coat popcorn with flavor? The "Reputation &amp; Moderation" page on any site (/help/site-moderators) still refers to the company behind Stack Exchange as Stack Exchange and not Stack Overflow.     Moderators act as a liaison between the community and Stack Exchange the company.   Seeing as how the name change was recent, I'm not surprised this hasn't been caught yet, and I'm sure there are other instances of this around somewhere. Let $T$ and $T^{'}$ be topologies on set $X$ such that $T \leq T^{'}$. If $(X,T^{'})$ is path-connected, is $(X,T)$ path connected? Let $T$ and $T^{'}$ be topologies on set $X$ such that $T \leq T^{'}$. If $(X,T^{'})$ is path-connected, is $(X,T)$ path-connected?  I think it is, and I tried to prove it by contradiction, but I got stuck. Any hint helps! I guess I'm asking for comments, with subsequent notifications, to be added to queries in SEDE, so we can point out [fixes]  to flawed queries, especially when [the query]  has a comment in it explaining the problem. I want to build an uncountable well-ordered set within the theory $Z^\textbf-$. So, I take $A=\omega$ (exists by infinity axiom) and define $$W:=\{(X,R)\in\mathcal{P}(A)\times\mathcal{P}(A\times A):\langle X,R\rangle\ \text{is a well-ordered set}\}$$  With this I consider the set $T:=W/\cong$ (where $\cong$ is isomorphism relation). Note that $W$ and $T$ are sets by power set axiom. So I define for each equivalence class $[x],[y]\in T$ the order  $$ [x]\leq_T[y]\Leftrightarrow \text{type}(x, R_x)\leq \text{type}(y,R_y) $$  Here, $R_x$ means the order of $x$ that make it belongs to $[x]$.   So, $T$ is well ordered by $\leq_T$ and it is uncountable.  Question: I don't pretty sure if I can build $\leq_ T$ without replacement axiom. Another doubt is, Can I take the $R_x$ without AC? Show that $13$ divides $2^{70} + 3^{70}$.   My main problem here is trying to figure out how to separate the two elements in the sum, and then use Fermat's little theorem. So how can I separate the two?  Thanks! How do I Sort a Multidimensional Array in PHP I have the Basic license for ArcGIS and so I cannot use the collapse dual lines to centreline tool or the river bathymetry toolset by ESSA as they both need an advanced license.   Any idea how I can find the centreline or thalweg of the canyons using another tool which works in the standard version of ArcGIS please? MySQL Error 1093 - Can't specify target table for update in FROM clause What is mirror lockup and what is its primary function? My SLR is equipped with the mirror lockup function. What does it do, and when would I employ such a feature? Meta duplicates don't require an answer. Don't suggest there is one when that's not true This request was sparked . The vote to close as a duplicate on meta, in contrast to the main site, does not require for the duplicate to have an answer. Yet, the closure message still says:     This question has been asked before and already has an answer.    ...even when this is not the case. Perhaps we should either only show this particular sentence if there is indeed an answer, or remove this altogether for meta.   Note: I fear this might be a duplicate request, but I was unable to find one. (Not even one without an answer :) ) Over the past few weeks, there have been a number of complaints about users making suggested edits en masse whose quality was at least questionable.  Let an example of a low-quality edit be the addition of the web-frameworks tag to dozens of questions about the PHP web framework Laravel. No one is ever going to use it in a search, but Laravel is a framework, right?  (If you disagree about this being a low-quality edit, please  bear with me anyway - my point here is that the system through which such conflicts could be settled is broken.)   Examples          This is a toxic situation guaranteed to create strife because -   The new user is happy to have found a way to participate and earn some rep; they may be genuinely feeling that they are improving the site. The reviewers greenlighting most of their suggestions confirms them in their belief.   The reviewers usually see only one edit - and it's easy to see how they might go, "meh, this isn't a terribly useful edit, but hey, maybe it helps someone, and it's a new user. No point discouraging them."   The veteran users who check out the editor see dozens of what they perceive as low-quality edits, usually ignoring anything else that should be fixed in the post. To the veterans, the new user is systematically looking for excuses to make their pointless edits, creating a giant mess in order to  gain some rep - a mess they have to clean up, while there are no consequences for the editor, who gets to keep their ill-gotten points. While a bad question or answer can be downvoted - usually leading to a change of behaviour eventually - the edit system looks like it's wide open for gaming.   So tensions are high, and when there's dialog it can be angry. I'm not saying either side is completely right. I'm completely prepared to believe that many of these edits are in good faith, etc. But it's a mess because it's frustrating people. As said, there are no consequences for bad-faith mass editing; apart from commenting on some random post, there is no way to communicate with an editor. The outcome of a moderator flag is very much uncertain.  The absence of a clear set of rules means there's plenty of room for heated arguments.    Something needs to change here.  Either   We need super clear rules on what makes a good tag edit Tag-only edits should be allowed only for 2k+ users, or they should not gain 2 reputation points for &lt;2k users The possible 1000 rep gain for suggested edits needs to be rate-limited (say, 200 per month) (this is my favourite!) The possible 1000 rep gain for suggested edits needs to be lowered, say to 500 or 250 Rollbacks of suggested edits should result in annulment of the 2 points gained (this is terrible) There should be a system to vote on edits (yes, that's been suggested before) There should be a defined and officially sanctioned pathway, and ruleset, for moderator flags cast about these users    ... or something else. But something needs to give. As a part of this script, I need to be able to check if the first argument given matches the first word of file. If it does, exit with an error message; if it doesn't, append the arguments to the file. I understand how to write the if statement, but not how to use grep within a script. I understand that grep will look something like this  grep ^$1 schemas.txt   I feel like this should be much easier than I am making it.  I'm getting an error "too many arguments" on the if statement. I got rid of the space between grep -q and then got an error binary operator expected.   if [ grep -q ^$1 schemas.txt ] then         echo "Schema already exists. Please try again"         exit 1 else         echo "$@" &gt;&gt; schemas.txt fi Can magnets rotate infinitely? Convert a list to a data frame List all files in all subfolders In windows, is there any way to get a list of all files in a folder, including all the files within all the subfolders? Are the "umbles" etymologically related? From      And we show telltale signs of early hypothermia, what the doctor and   the National Institutes of Health and other cold-weather cognescenti   call the "umbles."      First we lose some fine motor skills, McLaren says, "and we start to   fumble. And tumble. And stumble."      Then our cognitive abilities are compromised. "We mumble and we   grumble."   Are the "umbles", such as fumble, tumble, stumble, mumble and grumble, etymologically linked, either in terms of sharing a common ending, or entire words having a common ancestor?  Trying to do a search of the etymology of the umbles ended up giving the etymology of the word  instead.