Hello, I would suggest you are overthinking the meaning of 'can' in a sentence like this. Inside the mind of the native speaker of any language, structures are not processed in their individual parts (at least not on the conscious level) but rather as 'chunks' of meaning. 'Can' in your example is almost meaningless in isolation. It takes on meaning only as part of the whole phrase, which is a generic expression 'How hard can it be?' is used to express an expectation that a task will be relatively easy. I hope that helps!

'I cleared your debt' would imply that the speaker has paid the second person's debt, in whole, on their behalf. 'I cancelled your debt' (spelled with double l) would usually mean that the creditor has cancelled the borrower's debt, perhaps without it being paid. 'I cancelled the money you owe me' is understandable as meaning the same as the second phrase but sounds considerable less natural.

'On the morning of the third day' is the most elegant version. You could also say 'On the third day, in the morning' with the comma, it's necessary; or even 'On the third morning'. But your original version, though understandable, is not so clear or natural sounding.

You could say both, either 'I just hear the sound of the water dripping' or 'I just hear the sound of the dripping water'. I consider the meaning is the same and both are equally correct and natural. You wouldn't say dropping, if the volume of water were greater than just a drip, 'falling' would be preferred. Hope that helps.

Hi Mikhail, some of the answers here are incorrect. 'There ain't no' is not incorrect English nor is it slang. It is correct in a number of dialects of English, but not in standard English. 'There isn't any' is standard English.

na, often written as N/A, means 'not applicable'. In this case, the 'payload to low earth orbit' value is not applicable as the New Shepard rocket is not designed to enter orbit.

Hi José, The phrase seems incomplete, but I would guess that the complete phrase would be "With these new values held front and center" The key part then would be 'held front and center' which means to give something the greatest importance/priority or to make it the focus of attention.

Hi Pavel, In the first case, 'have been' is used because Jesus used it (at the last supper) in the past. He does not continue to use it today and therefore we cannot say "the cup believed to BE used by". With Galileo, again it is about when the events occurred. Galileo is dead, and thus we refer to his person in the past rather than the present. In both cases BE instead of HAVE BEEN would be grammatically correct English, but the meaning would be different and factually incorrect. On your second point, it is not case of 'have been' adding additional emphasis, but rather that it is the correct tense for these sentences. 'Seems' is in the present tense, because it SEEMS to us TODAY that he was the first person etc. Robert