The boys cut the cake in(by) two and ate half each?

[keannu]

Does by work in the below? I think so, maybe it means "amount" or "dividing criteria"

ex)The boys cut the cake inoops:by) two and ate half each.

 

[Rover_KE]

Only in works here (and maybe into).

Rover

 

[Khosro]

Does by work in the below? I think so, maybe it means "amount" or "dividing criteria"

ex)The boys cut the cake inoops:by) two and ate half each.

Since I know that you are practicing "below","over", ... I recommend that you say:"Does by work in the sentence below?"

below could be a preposition or adverb. It is not a noun. You can't say "in the below".

In Persian we also say "below's sentence" :-D and "the sentence in the below" but that's wrong in English!

 

[keannu]

Since I know that you are practicing "below","over", ... I recommend that you say:"Does by work in the sentence below?"

below could be a preposition or adverb. It is not a noun. You can't say "in the below".

In Persian we also say "below's sentence" :-D and "the sentence in the below" but that's wrong in English!

Below works as a noun,too.
This is from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/below

below

1) below (adverb)

1. 2) below (preposition)
2. 3) below (noun)
3. 4) below (adjective)
4. below-the-line
5. bail below
6. strike below
7. belt (noun)

Ads by Google

 

[SoothingDave]

You can say "in the below" but it doesn't sound natural.

 

[Khosro]

Below works as a noun,too.
This is from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/below

below



1) below (adverb)

1. 2) below (preposition)
2. 3) below (noun)
3. 4) below (adjective)
4. below-the-line
5. bail below
6. strike below
7. belt (noun)

Ads by Google

1- Oxford dictionary and Macmillan dictionary does not explain "below" as a noun.

2- Webster has an entry for it as a noun. It gives no example. further more, for other functions of "below" Webster lead the reader to another page with a link titled as "See below as defined for English-language learners", but for "below" as a name it has no such page.

3- Even if "below" is acceptable as a noun, I have serious daubts that it can be used the way you used it:"Does by work in the below?"

4- I thanked you because I like examining everything before accepting it as a truth.

 

[SoothingDave]

"In the following" is more idiomatic.

 

[Raymott]

Whether you call "below" a noun, or an adverb + noun or adj + noun with the noun ellipted, the following seem OK to me:
See the following; refer to the above, regarding the aforementioned;
(In an email) see the attached
etc.

 

[Khosro]

Whether you call "below" a noun, or an adverb + noun or adj + noun with the noun ellipted, the following seem OK to me:
See the following; refer to the above, regarding the aforementioned;
(In an email) see the attached
etc.

I think I understand now.

 

[BobK]

Whether you call "below" a noun, or an adverb + noun or adj + noun with the noun ellipted, the following seem OK to me:
See the following; refer to the above, regarding the aforementioned;
(In an email) see the attached
etc.

:up: ... though 'aforementioned' is a bit formal for some tastes. I find it interesting that near-opposite of 'the above' is 'the following'; 'the below' - as that dictionary implies is archaic. (In fact, I'd say that in keannu's 'Below works as a noun' the tense was wrong: it worked as a noun at one time. ;-))

b

 

[Coolfootluke]

Below works as a noun,too.
<snip>

I am not a teacher.

Not really. You can use just about anything as a noun if you don't mind sounding a bit strange, but "below" is pushing it.