0
Moon7296 Posted 11 years ago
Grammar
consistency? relative clause
1. That swimming was regularly taught is also suggested by many depictions of the crawl stroke -- a form of swimming that is not natural to man and which was invented again for competition less than a century ago.
2. That swimming was regularly taught is also suggested by many depictions of the crawl stroke -- a form of swimming that is not natural to man and that was invented again for competition less than a century ago.
Q) I was wondering why the second underlined part in the original sentence(#1) didn't use "that" just like the second underlined part in #2 considering consistency of using the same relative clause.
Q2) Can "that is" and "which was" in #1 be omitted?
2. That swimming was regularly taught is also suggested by many depictions of the crawl stroke -- a form of swimming that is not natural to man and that was invented again for competition less than a century ago.
Q) I was wondering why the second underlined part in the original sentence(#1) didn't use "that" just like the second underlined part in #2 considering consistency of using the same relative clause.
Q2) Can "that is" and "which was" in #1 be omitted?
Top answer
1 and 2 have the same meaning, but 2 has too many "that's," three in a row in the same sentence.
- 1 and 2 have the same meaning, but 2 has too many "that's," three in a row in the same sentence.
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
1 and 2 have the same meaning, but 2 has too many "that's," three in a row in the same sentence.
00
Anonymousbut 2 has too many "that's," three in a row in the same sentence.Really? Isn't "that's" used only twice? If three time, it'd have been too much. But isn't twice acceptable stylistically?
0
Related Questions