0
Momoko23 Posted 10 years ago
Grammar
were not/ would not
Since the remaining members were not/would not be available for a second recording at a later date, we therefore decided to go on with the recording without her.
Which one is better ? were not/would not be ??
Can I replace 'at a later date' with 'afterwards'??
Please correct the above sentences if they don't sound natural to your native ears. Cheers!
Which one is better ? were not/would not be ??
Can I replace 'at a later date' with 'afterwards'??
Please correct the above sentences if they don't sound natural to your native ears. Cheers!
Top answer
momoko23 Which one is better ? were not/would not be ?? I'd use "would not be", but both are fine.
- momoko23 Which one is better ?
- were not/would not be ??
- I'd use "would not be", but both are fine.
- "afterwards" seems vague compared to "at a later date".
- I would not replace what you have.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
momoko23Which one is better ? were not/would not be ??I'd use "would not be", but both are fine.
"afterwards" seems vague compared to "at a later date". I would not replace what you have.
"therefore" is not necessary as it is implied by "since".
CJ
00
Related Questions