|
English grammar question
|
View this Thread in Original format
| trancaholic |
Hep
I'm writing some important text, and I've found that I often end up needing to write something like:
"bla bla bla X, which is bla bla bla" - that is, using "which" to refer to something I just wrote. However, sometimes "X" would be an entire sentence, or at least a part of a sentence, as in: "...any further concerns of the decision maker, which should be addressed by...".
Now, one of my co-authors told me that "which" always refers back to the thing immediately before it ("the decision maker" in the previous example), and I'm wondering if this is true? Any native English speakers that can confirm/debunk this postulate?
"I'm having an awful time adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot. It's terrible!" - how the heck do you decide whether "it" refers to the robot, the awful time, the life without the robot, or simply the fact that I'm having an awful time adjusting to the life without my electric friend? And in the latter case, how would you rephrase this, without it turning into an linguistic elephant?
:conf: |
|
|
| LiGHT78 |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
Hep
I'm writing some important text, and I've found that I often end up needing to write something like:
"bla bla bla X, which is bla bla bla" - that is, using "which" to refer to something I just wrote. However, sometimes "X" would be an entire sentence, or at least a part of a sentence, as in: "...any further concerns of the decision maker, which should be addressed by...".
Now, one of my co-authors told me that "which" always refers back to the thing immediately before it ("the decision maker" in the previous example), and I'm wondering if this is true? Any native English speakers that can confirm/debunk this postulate?
"I'm having an awful time adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot. It's terrible!" - how the heck do you decide whether "it" refers to the robot, the awful time, the life without the robot, or simply the fact that I'm having an awful time adjusting to the life without my electric friend? And in the latter case, how would you rephrase this, without it turning into an linguistic elephant?
:conf: |
An english teacher would tell you that's wrong right off the bat because "It's terrible!" is a sentence fragment. U dont even need the "It's terrible," the sentence has the same sense without it.
I say if a reader wouldn't be able to tell what your "which" is referring to, it's a ty sentence and you should reword it. |
|
|
| willson |
I understand but just leave it
its agiven that its terrible will be about what you just said.
English is teh confusions. |
|
|
| wee_rooney |
| quote: |
"I'm having an awful time adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot, it's ing terrible!" |
thats the proper english ;) |
|
|
| wizniz |
switch awful in the original sentence to terrible.
youre good! :cool: |
|
|
| Mebot |
| You spelled help wrong. |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
Hep
"I'm having an awful time adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot. It's terrible!" - how the heck do you decide whether "it" refers to the robot, the awful time, the life without the robot, or simply the fact that I'm having an awful time adjusting to the life without my electric friend? And in the latter case, how would you rephrase this, without it turning into an linguistic elephant?
:conf: |
well, being a native english speaker, the phrase,
"I'm having an awful time adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot. It's terrible!"
well, i dont even need to think about it, but when i read that, i assumed "adjusting to a life without my sumo-robot" is what the pronoun (it) is replacing. |
|
|
| ::TranceVanDyk:: |
| quote: | Originally posted by LiGHT78
An english teacher would tell you that's wrong right off the bat because "It's terrible!" is a sentence fragment. U dont even need the "It's terrible," the sentence has the same sense without it.
I say if a reader wouldn't be able to tell what your "which" is referring to, it's a ty sentence and you should reword it. |
actually, "it's terrible" is a sentence because, a sentence only needs a subject, and a verb.
the subject is "It". the verb is "is". in addition it has an adjective(however thats spelled) which is terrible.
1. What is terrible? (subject)
2. "is" <--verb
3. Description of the subject (adjective)...The subject is, "terrible".
EDIT:: NOTE that, "It's" is just a contracted version of, "It is" |
|
|
| wizniz |
"im having a hard time adjusting..." leads the reader to wonder 'whats he having trouble adjusting to?'. this question is answered when you say "to life without my sumo robot."
the reader thinks "oh hes having trouble adjusting to the new lifestyle'.
its already well worded, the "its terrible!" is completely unnecessary and clunky if anything :cool: |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
You guys suck at English. and don't go "you spelled this wrong and you suck at punctuation." yeah I dont care right now...
It's terrible is referring to the life.
it's terrible is definitely a sentence :stongue: |
|
|
| astroboy |
| quote: | Originally posted by wizniz
"im having a hard time adjusting..." leads the reader to wonder 'whats he having trouble adjusting to?'. this question is answered when you say "to life without my sumo robot."
the reader thinks "oh hes having trouble adjusting to the new lifestyle'.
its already well worded, the "its terrible!" is completely unnecessary and clunky if anything :cool: |
That's a subjective point about taste and style, not an objective grammatical correction. IMO there's nothing wrong with adding "it's terrible" at the end... though the construction is rather typical of a children's storybook. |
|
|
|
|
