0
Park sang joon Posted 11 years ago
Grammar

Analyses of a sentence

In the early films, the daily life of a cowboy consisted mainly of shootouts with stagecoach robbers and cattle rustlers. Meanwhile, in real life, most cowboys were tending sprawling cattle herds under a hot, blazing sun. They didn't use their guns much, and, when they did, it was usually to shoot a coyote or rattlesnake.
[Source: Reading for Results Ninth Edition by Laraine Flemming]
I think it in indicates "when they did" and "to shoot" is a noun complement of "it."
I'd like to know if my thought is right.
  

Top answer

I suppose you could argue that "it" logically stands for "using their guns", but in reality I think it behaves more like a dummy "it", not strongly identified with a real referent, but understood as part of an idiomatic phrasing. "to" means "in order to". I don't really see that "to shoot" can be considered a "complement" in the normal sense that we see in, say, "it was a chicken", which I assume it what you mean.

— GPY

  • I suppose you could argue that "it" logically stands for "using their guns", but in reality I think it behaves more like a dummy "it", not strongly identified with a real referent, but understood as part of an idiomatic phrasing.
  • "to" means "in order to".
  • I don't really see that "to shoot" can be considered a "complement" in the normal sense that we see in, say, "it was a chicken", which I assume it what you mean.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

6 Answers
0
I suppose you could argue that "it" logically stands for "using their guns", but in reality I think it behaves more like a dummy "it", not strongly identified with a real referent, but understood as part of an idiomatic phrasing. "to" means "in order to". I don't really see that "to shoot" can be considered a "complement" in the normal sense that we see in, say, "it was a chicken", which I assume
0
0
I'm so sorry for my typo.Emotion: crying
I think "it" in in
0
0
park sang joonI should think you should have not written "it"; am I right?
Right, sorry, I accidentally typed "it" instead of "is".
park sang joonThen I was wondering if I omit the adverbial parts the rest have meaning.?it was.- Of example?"it was usually to shoot a coyote or rattlesnake."
I'm not sure what you a
0
0
park sang joonIn the early films, the daily life of a cowboy consisted mainly of shootouts with stagecoach robbers and cattle rustlers. Meanwhile, in real life, most cowboys were tending sprawling cattle herds under a hot, blazing sun. They didn't use their guns much, and, when they did, it was usually to shoot a coyote or rattlesnake.[Source: Reading for Results Ninth Ed
0
0
I'm so sorry for my belated question.Emotion: embarrassed
I was revewing my threads and a curiosity came into my mind.

In the early
0
0
park sang joonI'd like to know if "was to shoot" is similar to the underlined words of the following in the usage.1. Work hard if you are to pass the exam.2. If you are to buy a new ban, you should save your money.
No. As I think I mentioned earlier, "was usually to shoot" means "was usually in order to shoot", while the substitution of "in order to" in
0

Related Questions