0
Pokh Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

Participle modifier

In 1905 Bela Bartok and Zoltan Kodaly began their pioneering work in ethnomusicology, traveling the back roads of Hungary armed only with an Edison phonograph and insatiable curiosity.

Guys,

Please help me to understand the structure of the above sentence? What is armed only with an Edison phonograph and insatiable curiosity modifying? Should not there be AND between two modifier.. why is it missing?


  

Top answer

No conjunction is needed. The sentence structure is permissible and common. The two ethnomusicologists must be armed, of course, not Hungary.

— Mister Micawber

  • No conjunction is needed.
  • The sentence structure is permissible and common.
  • The two ethnomusicologists must be armed, of course, not Hungary.
  • They were travelling armed.
  • I was sitting exhausted.
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.

5 Answers
0
No conjunction is needed. The sentence structure is permissible and common. The two ethnomusicologists must be armed, of course, not Hungary. They were travelling armed. I was sitting exhausted.
0
0
Mister MicawberNo conjunction is needed. The sentence structure is permissible and common. The two ethnomusicologists must be armed, of course, not Hungary. They were travelling armed. I was sitting exhausted.
Thanks Micawber,

Can we always elide a conjunction appearing between two phrases or is it a special case? Moreover what makes it so sp
0
0
'Armed...' seems to modify the whole rest of the sentence, i.e. the two ethnomusicologists travelling.
0
0
If I add AND , will it still be correct?
0
0
The grammar would be correct. 'And' would, however, add the possible suggestion that they were always armed, not just when travelling. All in all, it is better omitted.
0

Related Questions