0
Square Posted 12 years ago
Grammar
stating that financial institutions
In Vietnam the AML Decree was issued by the government in June 2005, stating that financial institutions are required by law to report any suspicious transactions, deals in cash or foreign currencies and gold worth more than VND200 million and savings deposits of VND500 million upwards to the State Bank of Vietnam’s AML Centre.
Source: "Keeping clean", VNECONOMY.
Please help me understand the phrase "stating that financial institutions...."
Which one is correct?
1. Which (the decree) states that financial institutions....
2. Which (the decree) stated that financial institutions....
Source: "Keeping clean", VNECONOMY.
Please help me understand the phrase "stating that financial institutions...."
Which one is correct?
1. Which (the decree) states that financial institutions....
2. Which (the decree) stated that financial institutions....
Top answer
1. 2. Which (the decree) stated that financial institutions.
- 1.
- 2.
- Which (the decree) stated that financial institutions.
- There is no 'correct'—'stating' in the original has no tense but takes its reading by referring to the finite verb in the sentence ('was issued').
- As such, it can be read as either #1 or #2 depending on whether the reader is thinking of the decree at the time it was written or as it is now.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
SquareWhich one is correct?1. Which (the decree) states that financial institutions....2. Which (the decree) stated that financial institutions.There is no 'correct'—'stating' in the original has no tense but takes its reading by referring to the finite verb in the sentence ('was issued'). As such, it can be read as either #1 or #2 depending on whether the r
00
Thank you for help.
I understand your first point about "stating". It makes perfect sense to me. However, in the original sentence, "was issued" is the main verb not "states".
I understand your first point about "stating". It makes perfect sense to me. However, in the original sentence, "was issued" is the main verb not "states".
00
Square However, in the original sentence, "was issued" is the main verb not "states".So what?
00
In your sentence, "states" is the main verb. I don't know if that changes the emphasis of the sentence or not.
00
The issuing is obviously NOT the emphasis; it is the content of the degree, what is stated in it. That is one of the structural errors I corrected.
00
I see your point now.
How about this one?
...the AML Decree was issued by the government in June 2005, stating that financial institutions are required by law to report any suspicious transactions, dealings in c
How about this one?
...the AML Decree was issued by the government in June 2005, stating that financial institutions are required by law to report any suspicious transactions, dealings in c
00
SquareHow about this one?How about it? What is your question? I have already given you my revision.
00
In your sentence, "state" is the main verb while "issued" and "dealing" are used as participles.
In my version, I used "issued" as the main verb while "stating" and "dealing" are participles.
I am wondering if that is also OK.
In the original, from your correction, it is clear that "deals" should be used as a participle. Therefore, I created the sentence above.
In my version, I used "issued" as the main verb while "stating" and "dealing" are participles.
I am wondering if that is also OK.
In the original, from your correction, it is clear that "deals" should be used as a participle. Therefore, I created the sentence above.
00
SquareI am wondering if that is also OK.Yes, yours is structured correctly and addresses the original problems. I still hold my conviction on what should be the main verb, but few readers would notice the difference between yours and mine.
0
Related Questions