Ah, that`s it. I just went on your blog when I was looking for a way to explain to my post-studies, including in Poland (Gdansk), the difference between “according” and “in agreement with”. Thanks for the good work and helpful blog. I`ll come back! According to the order of work, we will meet on March 2. The reader Doug asked me the difference, if so, comes in agreement with and after. It was in accordance with the agreement imposed on the conflicting factions by the Shogunate that Takaharu, the junior branch, took the throne in 1318 and took the name go-Daigo government (“Later Daigo”). By law, cyclists must wear a helmet. For what it`s worth, most authors seem to agree with me: according to the 990 contracts filed last week on the SEC`s EDGAR system.
Under the terms “compliant” or “consensual,” this phrase is called “in agreement with.” This means that a rule or idea corresponds to something else with which it is compliant or compatible with something else (. B, for example, a law, a regulation or a person`s wishes). This term is generally used in formal or legal English. Here are some examples: In accordance with a general rule of medication law, the sponsor and examiner are responsible for the damage caused by running a clinical trial. “In agreement with… is used in more formal contexts to introduce the concept of compliance. In a legal context, it is used to explain what is in accordance with the law or a contract. It is never used to introduce information that may not be true. Garner`s Modern American Usage says that by means (1) “depends”; (2) “as declared or declared by (a person); ” or (3) “in agreement with.” It is relatively often used in contracts to convey the last of these meanings, as explained in “Any dispute must be resolved by arbitration according to the procedures of this section 12.10.” According to data from 240 contracts filed last week via the SEC`s EDGAR system.
I still use the two interchangeable expressions; Well, I am most often vulnerable to “in agreement with” in an academic context rather than “as a result.” The schedule did not say that. You have proposed it. We can`t keep up. However, if the timetable has a plan to “meet on March 2,” the proposal to meet on March 2 would approve the timetable. It would be on schedule. – participation in meetings, discussions and communications in Taiwan, Korea and the United States to discuss the prices of the TFT LCD panels; – agreed, during these meetings, discussions and communications, to calculate the prices of TFT LCD panels at certain pre-determined prices; – the offer of prices, in accordance with the agreements reached; There you go.