0
Guest Posted 22 years ago
Grammar
TO
A rising trend in the political risk rating "to" 1997 was followed by a declining trend "to" 2000, after which there was a slight improvement, with discernable volatility throughout the sample.
Can we change "to" to "in". Does it make sense, please advise.
Can we change "to" to "in". Does it make sense, please advise.
Top answer
As I suggested to you in your other thread, 'through' and 'in' are much preferable to 'to', which is confusing (presuming that the rising trend did not stop at 31 December 1996, and the declining trend did not stop at 31 December 1999).
- As I suggested to you in your other thread, 'through' and 'in' are much preferable to 'to', which is confusing (presuming that the rising trend did not stop at 31 December 1996, and the declining trend did not stop at 31 December 1999).
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
As I suggested to you in your other thread, 'through' and 'in' are much preferable to 'to', which is confusing (presuming that the rising trend did not stop at 31 December 1996, and the declining trend did not stop at 31 December 1999).
00
"to" and "in" mean different things in the context you have presented.
If the rising trend began in 1994 and ended just before 1997, for example, "to" is needed.
If the rising trend began in 1997 and ended in 1997, then "in" is needed.
The same logic applies to the declining trend, of course.
If the rising trend began in 1994 and ended just before 1997, for example, "to" is needed.
If the rising trend began in 1997 and ended in 1997, then "in" is needed.
The same logic applies to the declining trend, of course.
00
Sorry to disturb again. In this sentence the same problem arises.
Financial risk rating rose "to" 1997, fell substantially in 1997, rose to 75 by 1999, and had a steep decline "to" 2002, with little or no volatility, apart from five peaks from 1997 to 2001.
Can we replace "to" with "in". Please advise.
Financial risk rating rose "to" 1997, fell substantially in 1997, rose to 75 by 1999, and had a steep decline "to" 2002, with little or no volatility, apart from five peaks from 1997 to 2001.
Can we replace "to" with "in". Please advise.
00
OK, we'll try it another time:
If the rating rose only until 31 December 1996, then use 'to'.
If the rating declined steeply only until 31 December 2001, then use 'to',
If the rating rose between 1 Jan and 31 Dec 1997, then use 'in'.
If it suffered a steep decline between 1 Jan and 31 Dec 2002, then use 'in'.
Got it yet?
If the rating rose only until 31 December 1996, then use 'to'.
If the rating declined steeply only until 31 December 2001, then use 'to',
If the rating rose between 1 Jan and 31 Dec 1997, then use 'in'.
If it suffered a steep decline between 1 Jan and 31 Dec 2002, then use 'in'.
Got it yet?
0
Related Questions