It's hard to break "sense". You can still understand something if it hits the right words in roughly the right order - that doesn't stop it from being grammatically or semantically broken.
"You entered a partnership with someone, haven't you?" is grammatically incorrect. It only works if we add another "have", e.g. "You have entered a partnership with someone, haven't you?" to make it present infinitive tense. Otherwise it should be past tense "did". "You entered a partnership with someone, didn't you?"
Sorry but if you have no interest or care about English/language, then there's not much to discuss here. Good writing and language should be clear and concise - half the lines in the OP either feature semantic breaks (you can't "answer" expectations) or grammatical incongruities (the active "will determine" is infinitely better than passive "determines").
Yeah, I think that's the beef. It's the fact that this is a top-tier series with a lot of attention and reverence.
Even though the loc isn't abysmal, it deserved better.
I won't argue with the haven't didn't you are correct there but I'm going to have to say that answering expectations works perfectly fine. We know what he's referring to (answering ex unless we are going to go with an incredibly strict interpretation of the wording and completely ignore how people actually speak in real conversations.
If we are going that far I can't say I fell in love because you can't physically fall onto love. In fact we have to strip away all forms of metaphorical, or poetic interpretation in the writing just because you are excluding non-literal interpretations. It's just silly. We can easily read the word answer as "to act in reaction to" or to "conform or correspond to" and the wording is something a person speaking to another person would say.
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/answer definition 20