Has "where" been used properly here?

No, delete 'where is.' Now it's correct.

Although I must admit I'm a bit mystified as to why Americans tend to judge distance in terms of time. 8 minutes walk, or half an hours drive. How do you know that? It all depends on how fast you're going. Is it an 8 minute amble or an 8 minute brisk stroll? Is it half an hours drive with your foot down or half an hour stuck in traffic? Shouldn't distance be judged in terms of distance? It's about quarter of a mile down the road or half a mile down the road, not an 8 minute walk.

No, one would write: "It's on a street eight minutes walk from here." Additionally, i would note that in the American language, one would usually insert a condition: ". . . about eight minutes walk . . ." Furthermore, one usually does not use ciphers for numbers less than ten. One would write ". . . eight minutes . . . " rather than ". . . 8 minutes."

We've covered this. It's not the American language now is it? Give my regards to Liz.

Thank you guys.

It is clear now that the usage "where is" is awkward and should be deleted. But grammatically speaking, is the antecedent where used properly? Or should use "which" instead of "where?"

You could use which instead of where, but it's probably best to just leave it out.

I think the replacement of where with which the most appropriate form.

Where makes not sense at all. Which can reasonably be used, but it is not needed to make a sensible sentence.

If one usually does not use "ciphers for numbers less than ten", then on what occasions would one use "ciphers for numbers less than ten"?

"I'd like a glass of 7-Up" said John.

An eight minute walk isn't far, in either city or country terms. Walk out your front door and walk for eight minutes and see how far away you are. Not very. You could just say "It's about an eight minute walk from here" or "It's on a street THAT's about an eight minute walk.

An eight minute walk isn't far, in either city or country terms. Walk out your front door and walk for eight minutes and see how far away you are. Not very. You could just say "It's about an eight minute walk from here" or "It's on a street THAT's about an eight minute walk." I'd also say "eight minute" rather than "eight minutes' ". It's functioning more as an adjective than a possessive.

Using 'about' makes it even more vague, if someone gave me directions and used time as an indicator of distance I wouldn't be happy. We all walk at different speeds. You don't do it the other way round. If you ask how long something would be you don't expect to be told as long as it would take to run ten miles you want an answer in time.

Admittedly an eight minute walk isn't a great distance, but a half hour drive? And Americans do use that, it was on the episode of the Simpsons when they were looking for treasure under a big T. Homer was told to take a half hour drive. I just think it's unecessarily confusing.

Doesn't confuse us, and time is often a better measure than distance. Two miles in New York City usually takes a much longer time to cover than two miles in the Texas flatlands.

It's still two miles though. I don't know, I just don't think how long something takes to travel, just how far it is. If I've been on a specific journey fine, I can say how long that took. there's a town called Romsey about ten miles down the road from where I live in Southampton. It's never taken me the same amount of time to go there. Once I did it in ten minutes, and once it took an hour. I've just got back and it took half an hour, it all depends what the traffic's like. If it works for you that's fine, but it seems counterintuitive. But whatever lights your candle

And people are notoriously inaccurate about estimating mileage, too, izzy. My house to Fenway Park (baseball stadium) is a bit above four miles if you go by what is usually the fastest route, about 3 1/2 if you cut out some of the loops, about 2 1/2 if you take the shortest streets (but most traffic), and god knows how long if yoju take the T (mass transit) which is 9 stops plus the time it takes to walk to the nearest station. What gives you the most accurate impression of how far away it is?

Yeah, I suppose you've got a point there. To be quite honest when I give directions I focus on the roads, landmarks and whether it's the first or third on the left. I only tend to talk about distance if there's a long drive before the next turning. Still life would be boring if we were all the same

Izzy, true that. I had a girlfriend who planned her routes so she'd have to make as few left turns as possible (we drive on the right--it'd probably be right turns for you guys on the left), becaue she hated making turns across oncoming traffic. Never thought to figure out how much distance that added to her plans.

We've got a proramme called 'would I lie to you,' in which panellists tell stories that the others have to say if it's a lie or true. One of them said he had a car that had a crash and could only make right turns, and had to drive about for a week like that. Unfortunately I can't remember if it was a lie or not.

Anyway it's a pity you didn't advise the people that made that awful film about Will and Kate, because allegedly(I've not seen the film. I'm not bothered about the Royals) the traffic in London was all driving on the right.