0
Jeff_999 Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Is there something wrong with the sentence
0 This is a desire to throw over reality a light that never 01 i 00 was 02 i 00 might give away abruptly to the desire on the part of what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture of a flower? 02 br
02 br
00 Isn't ‘was' in italic type unwanted in this sentence, because we already have the subordinate verb "give away to"? 02 br
02 br
00 And 01 i 00 what 02 i 00 in "on the part of what " is referring to what? Don't you think it has to be replaced by 01 i 00 which 02 i 00 , if it refers to "the desire"? 0-
02 br
00 Isn't ‘was' in italic type unwanted in this sentence, because we already have the subordinate verb "give away to"? 02 br
02 br
00 And 01 i 00 what 02 i 00 in "on the part of what " is referring to what? Don't you think it has to be replaced by 01 i 00 which 02 i 00 , if it refers to "the desire"? 0-
Top answer
" 0-
- " 0-
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
0 I think that the mistake in your sentence is the addition of "is a" (second and third word in the sentence) and should be deleted and corrected to:- 02 br
02 br
00 "This desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give away abruptly to the desire on the part of what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture
02 br
00 "This desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give away abruptly to the desire on the part of what we might consider a novelist-scientist to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture
00
0 I'd like to change your sentence the way like; 02 br
02 br
00 On the part of what [=the people] we might consider as a novelist-scientist, this desire to throw a light over reality might never give 01 i 00 way 02 i 00 abruptly to the desire to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture. 02 br
02 br
00 I think what the sentence wan
02 br
00 On the part of what [=the people] we might consider as a novelist-scientist, this desire to throw a light over reality might never give 01 i 00 way 02 i 00 abruptly to the desire to record exactly and concretely the structure and texture. 02 br
02 br
00 I think what the sentence wan
00
0 Thanks so much, temico and paco. 02 br
01 blockquote
00 It sounds reasonable. It may be 'A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give away abruptly to ....' 02 br
01 blockquote
00 I think that the mistake in your sentence is the addition of "is a" (second and third word in the sentence) and should be deleted 12 blockquote12 br
00 It sounds reasonable. It may be 'A desire to throw over reality a light that never was might give away abruptly to ....' 02 br
00
0 I agree with temico on this one. Just my 2 penn'orth! 05 0 010id 1
00
0 To jeff 999, 02 br
02 br
00 "a light that never was" means( to me, anyway) "a light THAT WAS NEVER there in the first place" or "unfounded". e.g. 02 br
00 i) "There NEVER WAS anybody named John in our company." 02 br
00 ii) "John is a somebody WHO NEVER WAS in our company." 02 br
00 iii) "In our company, John is a somebody WHO NEVER WAS(there)."
02 br
00 "a light that never was" means( to me, anyway) "a light THAT WAS NEVER there in the first place" or "unfounded". e.g. 02 br
00 i) "There NEVER WAS anybody named John in our company." 02 br
00 ii) "John is a somebody WHO NEVER WAS in our company." 02 br
00 iii) "In our company, John is a somebody WHO NEVER WAS(there)."
00
0 Thank you. 05 0 02 br
02 br
00 You shed a brilliant light on it! 010id 1
02 br
00 You shed a brilliant light on it! 010id 1
0
Related Questions