0
NL888 Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Should unions here be union's?
Context:
When people speak of'the law of the jungle', they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition, with everyone out solely for his own advantage. But the phrase was coined by Rudyard Kipling, in The Second nar ...
When people speak of'the law of the jungle', they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition, with everyone out solely for his own advantage. But the phrase was coined by Rudyard Kipling, in The Second nar ...
Top answer
No. The reference is to unrestrained trade unions . The adjective 'unrestrained' is in an unusual position.
- No.
- The reference is to unrestrained trade unions .
- The adjective 'unrestrained' is in an unusual position.
- PS - edited because I mean to say 'restrained'.
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.
The reference is to unrestrained trade unions.
The adjective 'unrestrained' is in an unusual position.
PS - edited because I mean to say 'restrained'.
The reference is to unrestrained trade unions.
The adjective 'unrestrained' is in an unusual position.
PS - edited because I mean to say 'restrained'.
00
HI
I think we need to get clear on whether the writer means restrained (which is what they wrote) or unrestrained (which seems to have come out of nowhere)
- In the UK, unions were restrained by the Combination Act of 1799. It was repealed in 1824 (to avoid a descent into the law of the jungle)
Dave
I think we need to get clear on whether the writer means restrained (which is what they wrote) or unrestrained (which seems to have come out of nowhere)
- In the UK, unions were restrained by the Combination Act of 1799. It was repealed in 1824 (to avoid a descent into the law of the jungle)
Dave
00
So "they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition" mean "they usually mean unions will go through restrained and ruthless competition"?
00
Hi
Yes
In the sentence you gave, "unions" is followed by an adjective. As Clive says, that's unusual but it is OK. When it happens, there is no apostrophe
There would be one in:
- They gained fair pay through the union's strength
- They gained fair pay through the unions' strength
(... depending on whether there were one union or many)
Da
Yes
In the sentence you gave, "unions" is followed by an adjective. As Clive says, that's unusual but it is OK. When it happens, there is no apostrophe
There would be one in:
- They gained fair pay through the union's strength
- They gained fair pay through the unions' strength
(... depending on whether there were one union or many)
Da
00
When people speak of 'the law of the jungle', they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition, with everyone out solely for his own advantage.
So "they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition" mean "they usually mean unions will go through restrained and ruthless competition"?
So "they usually mean unions restrained and ruthless competition" mean "they usually mean unions will go through restrained and ruthless competition"?
0
Related Questions