I translated a title of an editorial from my language (Korean) to English and want to know if it sounds okay!
"The ruling party excluding the ‘income-led growth’ and ‘nuclear power plant closure’ policy from its pledges for the general election should make its course clear."
1. Did I use the articles correctly in 'a title of an editorial'(underline)?
2. having excluded vs excluding
: At first, I put 'having excluded' in the sentence but changed my mind like the sentence above
because a sentence with 'excluding' feels more proper to me but without any specific reason T.T
Would you explain which one is correct and why?
3. policy vs policies
: Although the editorial covers two policies (income-led growth, nuclear power plant closure),
I thought those two belong to one general policy of the government and chose 'policy' other than 'policies'.
Is it okay?
4. I used the preposition 'for' and do you think this choice was good?
Thank you for reading my post and I'm looking forward to getting your comments! ?????
" This sentence does not read properly. The main problem is that it is unclear how "excluding" is supposed to fit with "should make". I would need to understand what you are trying to say before attempting to correct it.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
ANNE202"The ruling party excluding the ‘income-led growth’ and ‘nuclear power plant closure’ policy from its pledges for the general election should make its course clear."
This sentence does not read properly. The main problem is that it is unclear how "excluding" is supposed to fit with "should make". I would need to understand what you are trying to say
ANNE202Teachers! Does this sentence seems okay?
When the helping verb "do" is used in an interrogative sentence, the base form of the main verb is used.
"The ruling party excluding the ‘income-led growth’ and ‘nuclear power plant closure’ policy from its pledges for the general election should make its course clear."
It is a very poor sentence from the point of clarity.
First, the non-finite clause (excluding the ‘income-led growth’ and ‘nuclear power plant closure’ policy from its pledges for the gener