0
Elviajero Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Omitting "that", "who are"/"that are" and using quotes - Questions
0 I need help with the following sentences. The first and fifth sentences are from 01 i 00 The New York Times. 02 i 00 Others are slight modifications of the original sentences. I would like to know which of the other forms are acceptable. Please help. Thanks. 02 br
02 br
00 1. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. (NYT) 02 br
00 2. A nuclear fusion power station is the "Holy Grail" for scientists trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. (Note double quotes instead of single) 02 br
00 3. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists WHO ARE trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. 02 br
00 4. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists THAT ARE trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. 02 br
02 br
00 5. But critics argue it could be at least 50 years before a commercially viable reactor is built, if at all. (NYT) 02 br
00 6. But critics argue THAT it could be at least 50 years before a commercially viable reactor is built, if at all. 02 br
02 br
0-
02 br
00 1. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. (NYT) 02 br
00 2. A nuclear fusion power station is the "Holy Grail" for scientists trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. (Note double quotes instead of single) 02 br
00 3. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists WHO ARE trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. 02 br
00 4. A nuclear fusion power station is the 'Holy Grail' for scientists THAT ARE trying to find a viable alternative to the world's depleting stocks of oil and gas. 02 br
02 br
00 5. But critics argue it could be at least 50 years before a commercially viable reactor is built, if at all. (NYT) 02 br
00 6. But critics argue THAT it could be at least 50 years before a commercially viable reactor is built, if at all. 02 br
02 br
0-
Top answer
0 Hi elviajero 02 br 02 br 00 when using a verb form with 'ing'(as in the first sentence above) you can omit 'who+be' and 'that+be' after scientists 02 br 00 Consequently, #3 and 4 are correct and completely acceptable: 'who' refer to persons, such as scientists, and 'that' can also refer to persons though it is more acceptable to use 'who' in this case. 02 br 00 about the double and single quotes, I don't know the differences... 0-
- 0 Hi elviajero 02 br 02 br 00 when using a verb form with 'ing'(as in the first sentence above) you can omit 'who+be' and 'that+be' after scientists 02 br 00 Consequently, #3 and 4 are correct and completely acceptable: 'who' refer to persons, such as scientists, and 'that' can also refer to persons though it is more acceptable to use 'who' in this case.
- 02 br 00 about the double and single quotes, I don't know the differences...
- 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.
2 Answers
0
0 Hi elviajero 02 br
02 br
00 when using a verb form with 'ing'(as in the first sentence above) you can omit 'who+be' and 'that+be' after scientists 02 br
00 Consequently, #3 and 4 are correct and completely acceptable: 'who' refer to persons, such as scientists, and 'that' can also refer to persons though it is more acceptable to use 'who' in this case. 02 br
02 br
00 when using a verb form with 'ing'(as in the first sentence above) you can omit 'who+be' and 'that+be' after scientists 02 br
00 Consequently, #3 and 4 are correct and completely acceptable: 'who' refer to persons, such as scientists, and 'that' can also refer to persons though it is more acceptable to use 'who' in this case. 02 br
00
Related Questions