Why is the answer C and B?

“It’s two hours’ journey…” is technically correct but majority of English speakers would say “it’s a two hour journey…” And “they are set” and “they are due” are both entirely correct depending on context. “They are set” means (normally) they are on track to arrive at that time. “The plane is set to land at 10pm”. “They are due” typically means the person saying it doesn’t know for sure when the other person will arrive but they are suppose to arrive at a given time. It’s usually in my experience smaller time scales, like “grandma is due to arrive any minute”

For 59, both a and c are perfectly grammatical and make perfect sense, with slightly different meanings. Due means scheduled, and set means prepared. So there’s nothing wrong with saying either of these things, depending on your situation.

The first one is like how you can describe something as 'one day's work' or 'a one-day job'. The hyphenated form is an adjective, the other is expressed as a possessive phrase.

58. With the time, we use the possessive with time to say that it is associated with that period of time. "It's a two hours' trip to Paris" or "We'll be there in an hour's time." Imagine the time like a container that possesses that trip within it. We also do it with other things, like money. "Get a dollar's worth of gas" or "the cake takes two tablespoons worth of vanilla." If it makes you feel better, I feel the construction of that sentence in the question feels odd to me. I'd naturally say "It's a two-hour trip to Paris," making the time it takes into an adjective (and trip instead of journey), instead. But with the answer's provided, only B works. D is an adjective, but it is made incorrectly (correct would be "two-hour"). C has the apostrophe wrong, since it's more than one hour. A lacks the apostrophe at all. B is grammatically correct, if a bit unnatural feeling. 59. I'd say "They're set to arrive" (or, more likely, "They're all set to arrive") interchangeably with "They're due to arrive" in most conversations. Using "set" is more casual, and generally used to reaffirm plans that were made and are still ongoing, but the difference is slight, and I'd consider the question as having two correct answers.

i think 58 is focusing on the word Journey and not hours. I think it sounds awkward but it still works. 59) if you say they “are SET” to arrive, it is focusing on the travelers. If you say they “are DUE” it focuses on the person waiting on them. Like the travelers expect to be there on Friday versus I expect the travelers to be there on Friday. I’ve heard your answers and the correct answers before in spoken language.

58. "2 hours' journey" isn't normal, but it is valid grammar. Using the posessive form to *describe* the journey, and therefore no article is required, so A is incorrect. Usually, though, we'd say "A 2-hour journey". "2-hour" is a compound adjective, so it's singular. Therefore the other options are incorrect. 59. "They are set to arrive" is valid, and shouldn't be marked as incorrect. "They are due to arrive" is more common. "on the verge" and "on the brink" would require "of" and a continuous verb; "They are on the verge of arriving". "They are on the brink to" and "They are on the verge to" are grammatically incorrect.

59, consider the typical collocations. When we use “verge” and “brink” it is followed by “of” + verb ing- on the brink of arriving …. On the verge of arriving…

In 58, hour would need to be singluar for A to work, so B is the right answer. In 59, C is the more formal answer while A is perfectly fine, but less correct overall. A is what one would use in everyday spoken English while C is what you need to say when being judged based on your grammar.

two hour journey, two band concert, two plate meal this is perfectly acceptable English

I don't know the answer for 58, but for 59, it all comes down to context, which in your defense, the question doesn't give you. Both are grammatically correct. They do have slightly different meanings though. "Due to arrive" is what is planned, "set to arrive" is what is most likely. An example, "my package is due to arrive on Thursday, but because of delays in shipping, it is set to arrive on Friday." Sure, in a lot of contexts, both will be the same and you can usually use them interchangeably, but when it is applicable, it is an important distinction. The most common time you'll hear someone use "due to" rather than "set to" in everyday conversation is if they have doubts that it is going to arrive on time, and that choice of words will clue you into the fact that they aren't actually expecting it at that time. On a related note, the same connotation applies when someone says "should arrive" or "should be here", they aren't expecting it to be on time. A common example on that is asking "when will the bus come" and the person replies 'it should be here in five minutes", they are indicating that the schedule says it will be there in five minutes, but from experience, expect it to be late. If they had confidence in when the bus would arrive, they would say, "it will be here in five minutes." That's the same distinction as "due" and "set" in that question. Again though, that question doesn't give you enough context to know which is the correct answer. They should have added parenthetical information after the question to specify that this is referring to what is scheduled.

You'll find lots of web resources for learning English that give multiple-choice questions with misleading answers. Most of these are not written by native speakers, and follow obscure perceived rules that most native speakers don't follow.

Look at the structure, for starters, you have an article before it, after it there's the hour long information, it should work as an adjective right? But it isn't. If you rewrite the sentence, it'd go something like: it's a journey OF two hours. Which means, when you put it like that, it's like the journey is part of the hours. Possession doesn't mean you necessarily own something, but that something is part of something, something belongs to something, something complements something. In English, for instance, you can express possession without a preposition or the s mark, such as "a car window", "a house door". They're both part of the whole thing. Hours' journey: journey of hours. So... it's a two hours' journey. Of course, the spoken language will differ and it's correct to say: it's a two-hour journey and in this case, two-hour actually acts as an adjective to describe the journey, so it should be glued together. You can see the same thing with age. She's 20 years old. She's a 20-year-old woman. So it's up to you. It's a five-minute walk - a walk that lasts five minutes It's a five minutes' walk. - a walk of five minutes. But among the options they gave you, only one is correct.

And I forgot to answer the second one On the verge of doing something Due to do something On the brink of doing something Set to do something Now why is set incorrect. That got me. Seems perfectly fine that they're set/due to arrive. I think it's more about the idea that they have a due date?

For 58, the reason it's "two hours' journey" is that "hours" was already plural, so you put the apostrophe after it. If you said "two hour's" you would be removing the plural adjustment to hours. But this way it's both plural and possessive.

It seems weird but "two hours' journey" means that the subject *two hours* is in possession of the object *journey*. The journey belongs to two hours. An alternative formation of the same relationship is *a journey of two hours* with the *of* indicating possession. It is the same as Bill's journey. It's only one letter away from a two-hour journey but in that case the relationship is entirely different. In that two-hour is an adjective of jouney, like green or tall.

First one i think should be D. As the rules of making an adjective out of two words is using the -. So, it a two-hour journey. Am I missing something?

As a North American English speaker, two hours drive/train is not a trip that I’d call a journey anyway. I’d say “It’s two hours to Paris” or “It’s a two hour [x] ride to Paris”. As for the second problem, I’d say “set” or “due” interchangeably and wouldn’t think twice if somebody said either.

“It’s two hours to Paris” is correct or “it’s a two hour journey to Paris” … I don’t see how c is correct 🤣🤣

58: for some reason, in American, we say "it's a two-hour journey". I'm not sure why we break the rule and don't use the plural form, but it is what it is. The alternative that they picked as the answer says that the journey belongs to two hours. So it's "two hours' journey".

for 59, “are on the verge” and “are on the brink” would both be followed by “of” so, they can’t really work. “are on the verge of arriving” and “are on the brink of arriving” would turn the verb into a gerund and, while not really grammatically incorrect, would. make the sentence sound unnatural.

I would definitely say, “It’s a two hours’ journey,” and “are set” is completely correct.

58. Two hours' journey or a two-hour journey.

That's why I don't learn EN all just wired rules per capital

58 is because hour is possessing journey, and it's plural so hours'. 59 would be right either way funnily enough, your test is wrong

58 could be “a 2 hour journey”. When the length of time is used to describe the trip as opposed to possessing it, hour is used in the singular.

I think none of the answers is correct for 58. As a native English speaker, I've never heard anyone say any of those options, and would always say "it's a two-hour journey." In this situation, even though you're using a number that's greater than one, you still use the singular noun. For example, "That looks heavy, it's going to be a five-man lift." "This is a four-seat car." If I had to pick one of the options for 58, I would have chosen B the same as you as it looks the most natural.

I’m a native speaker and for 58 I would say A as well. For 59 I’d say either is correct A or C and honestly I’d probably say C it’s more natural sounding 🤷‍♂️