Tibet

Question

Tibet had been ruled by spiritual leaders who were believed to be decendants of the Buddha for many centuries. They thought of their community as a separate community, however, China never agreed. In the 1950s, the Chinese government decided to make it clear that Tibet is a part of China, however, the approach taken wasn't the most diplomatic one - an invasion. Thousands of Tibetan monks were killed and many more fled into exile in India. China succeeded to take control of the holy land. To outsiders, Tibet looked like a harmony city under the new rule of the Chinese, but every Tibetan was angry with the government in silence.

Are there any mistakes?
Thanks.

Avangi · Accepted Answer

I don't think "however" works as a correlative conjunction. (Two sentences.) (Maybe I used the wrong term - haven't thought of it for sixty years.)

What does "for many centuries" modify??

You did it again with the "however." !

succeeded in taking I think. (now I'm not sure.) We would say, "China proceded to take control."

New2grammar · Answer

Thanks, Avangi.

AvangiWhat does "for many centuries" modify??

the length of being ruled by spiritual leaders. Is it not clear?

AvangiI don't think "however" works as a correlative conjunction

Woudl it be better if I break the sentence into two smaller ones by placing a period before the however?

Avangisucceeded in taking I think. (now I'm not sure.) We would say, "China proceded to take control."

Are you saying even succeded in taking is not idiomatic?

Avangi · Answer

New2grammarThanks, Avangi.
AvangiWhat does "for many centuries" modify??
the length of being ruled by spiritual leaders. Is it not clear? misplaced modifier - (decendants of the Buddha for many centuries)
AvangiI don't think "however" works as a correlative conjunction
Woudl it be better if I break the sentence into two smaller ones by placing a period before the however? Much. I don't believe "however" may be correctly used to connect two independent clauses.
Avangisucceeded in taking I think. (now I'm not sure.) We would say, "China proceded to take control."
Are you saying even succeded in taking is not idiomatic? No, I'm not. I know "succeeded in taking" is correct. I was beginning to think that "succeeded to take" might also be correct.

But I don't believe it is. - A.

New2grammar · Answer

Thanks, Avangi.One last question for you.

Would it be OK if I had said

Tibe had been ruled by spiritual leaders for years.

I believe it would be fine.

I wonder why when I add an adjectival phrase (may not be the right term, I mean the who part) it becomes wrong. Perhaps I didn't put commas before and after the phrase. I'm just not good at commas.

and I'm learning slowly.

Avangi · Answer

New2grammarTibet had been ruled by spiritual leaders who were believed to be decendants of the Buddha for many centuries.

"Tibet had been ruled by spiritual leaders for years," is fine as a stand-alone sentence.

In your version above, it sounds like, "For years the spiritual leaders were believed to be decendants of the Buddha. But now we know they are not.

You must patiently look for a way to get the modifier closer to what it's supposed to modify. Look where I just put "for years"!

What's wrong with, "For years Tibet had been ruled by spiritual leaders who were believed to be decendants of the Buddha." ???

<< and I'm learning slowly >> You're learning very danged fast!

New2grammar · Answer

AvangiWhat's wrong with, "For years Tibet had been ruled by spiritual leaders who were believed to be decendants of the Buddha." ???

Thanks, Avangi. I get what you mean. It's just that when my brain is so focused on expanding one thing, it doesn't realize that the integrity of the sentence will be directly impacted, as shown in my example. It's difficult to construct sentences when we don't have the feel that native speakers have. You would naturally change the position of the modifer if you were to describe the leaders in detail. In fact, the sentence would have been structured in such a way even before you open your mouth. Impressive!

Thanks. Avangi. But I still make a lot of mistakes.

Avangi · Answer

<< the sentence would have been structured in such a way even before you open your mouth. >>

I sometimes ponder such things. I suspect the mind is more like a computer than we care to admit. The "creating / structuring" of complicated sentences is less creative / analytical engineering than highly automated drudgery.
We have stored a gigantic catalog of model samples - a greeting card for every occasion. As the need arises, we flip through the catalog at warp speed until we find something that fits. I'm reminded of something Hoa Thai once posted about search engines, although he claimed no expertise on the subject. By categorizing into smaller groups, we don't actually need to search the whole catalog.

I read many years ago that Chinese students learn(ed) their native language by memorizing poetry (may or may not be true), which is something I encouraged my own children to do. I think it helps build a "quality" catalog. Perhaps this is why Marius is always encouraging beginning learners to do more reading.

Unfortunately, you guys are forced to take an analytical approach. You don't have five or ten years to spend steeping yourselves in the language. And you're long past the age where/when learning a new language is a slam-dunk. ESL students are given rules and categories that native speakers have never heard of, in what I see as a desperate attempt to make order out of chaos.
- A.

New2grammar · Answer

I totally agree with you. It's sad but true!

It's sad when what you say is interpreted wrongly. It makes you look like an idiot.

Avangi · Answer

I know the feeling.  You just try to get over it and do something that makes you feel good about yourself again.

Tibet

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions