0
Guest Posted 22 years ago
Grammar

Seeing

Checks of the time setting should be limited in these cases to seeing if daylight savings if implemented has occurred every spring and autumn and if leap years have been incorporated every 4 years. In this sentence can we replace see for seeing, kindly explain.
  

Top answer

No, for good grammar, you cannot. The noun (gerund) 'seeing' is the object of the verb 'should be limited to', and a verb ('see') cannot be the object. There seem to be other problems with the punctuation, though.

— Mister Micawber

  • No, for good grammar, you cannot.
  • The noun (gerund) 'seeing' is the object of the verb 'should be limited to', and a verb ('see') cannot be the object.
  • There seem to be other problems with the punctuation, though.
  • '
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.

2 Answers
0
No, for good grammar, you cannot. The noun (gerund) 'seeing' is the object of the verb 'should be limited to', and a verb ('see') cannot be the object.

There seem to be other problems with the punctuation, though. If I may:

'Checks of the time setting should be limited in these cases to seeing if daylight savings (if implemented) has occurred every spring and autumn, and if l
0
0
That would change the meaning.

1) Checks should be limited to seeing if ...

2) Checks should be limited to see if ...

1) tells what the checks should be limited to.
2) tells why the checks should be limited.

To me it's clear from what follows in the sentence (spring, autumn, leap years) that only the first version (with "seeing") really makes much se
0

Related Questions