0
Kevin X Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Be refused (to do) or (doing) something?
Hi guys,
I know I can say, "Paul was refused the job."
But should I say,
Paul was refused applying for the job. OR
Paul was refused to apply for the job.
I favor the first one, but I'm not sure. Maybe both of them sound odd to native speakers.
Thanks.
I know I can say, "Paul was refused the job."
But should I say,
Paul was refused applying for the job. OR
Paul was refused to apply for the job.
I favor the first one, but I'm not sure. Maybe both of them sound odd to native speakers.
Thanks.
Top answer
No. Even the first one sounds like an awkward passive construction. These are better.
- No.
- Even the first one sounds like an awkward passive construction.
- These are better.
- They refused to give Paul the job.
- The didn't give the job to Paul.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
No.
Even the first one sounds like an awkward passive construction. These are better.
They refused to give Paul the job.
The didn't give the job to Paul.
They refused to let Paul apply for the job.
Even the first one sounds like an awkward passive construction. These are better.
They refused to give Paul the job.
The didn't give the job to Paul.
They refused to let Paul apply for the job.
00
Kevin Xboth of them sound oddThey do sound odd. They're wrong. It's refuse to do.
There is no be refused to do or be refused doing.
The verb refuse doesn't work as you think. You'd need something like prevent:
be [prevented / kept / stopped / blocked / discouraged] from doing
But
0
Related Questions