Reply
Thu 12 Mar, 2015 07:55 am
The following sentences have been taken from 'The Handbook of Good English."
"The President, whose term in office had hardly begun when the opposition in Congress, which included members of his own party, capitulated to public opinion, changing the nature of his party leadership." The sentence is confusing, and it takes some study to reveal that the confusion results from a fragment. Was it the President or the opposition that capitulated? If it was the opposition, then the whole sentence is a fragment, because The President, which is obviously the subject of the sentence, has no verb to be the subject of.
Why 'of' is included to the next of the word 'subject' in the last sentence (to be the subject of )? If I wish to omit 'of', what differences will arise?
@Nousher Ahmed,
Nousher Ahmed wrote:
The following sentences have been taken from 'The Handbook of Good English."
"The President, whose term in office had hardly begun when the opposition in Congress, which included members of his own party, capitulated to public opinion, changing the nature of his party leadership." The sentence is confusing, and it takes some study to reveal that the confusion results from a fragment. Was it the President or the opposition that capitulated? If it was the opposition, then the whole sentence is a fragment, because The President, which is obviously the subject of the sentence, has no verb to be the subject of.
Why 'of' is included to the next of the word 'subject' in the last sentence (to be the subject of )? If I wish to omit 'of', what differences will arise?
Yes, that is a poorly constructed sentence. It's inherently ambiguous and I don't see any way to make the message clear without interrogating the author. As it is written, it doesn't offer a clear message. I would ask the author to start over and perhaps make two unambiguous sentences. There is no prize for writing the most convoluted grammar stuctures.
Main subject and verb:
president/ capitulated
@Nousher Ahmed,
Quote: The following sentences have been taken from 'The Handbook of Good English."
Was this included as an example of "Good English?"
@FBM,
Quote:If I wish to omit 'of', what differences will arise?
The "of" is necessary, and cannot be omitted.
Writing the sentence again, and turning it round:
The President, which is obviously the subject of the sentence, has no verb of which to be the subject.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace