0
   

Would it be wrong to remove 'first'?

 
 
Reply Sun 7 Apr, 2019 06:37 am
KUALA LUMPUR, April 7 — Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar has thanked Putrajaya today after the latter was forced to withdraw the ratification of the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court (ICC) following political pressure.

In a statement, the Sultan of Johor also expressed hope that the government will always put public welfare first ahead of political expediency.

“I say thank you to the Malaysian government for hearing the voice of the people to cancel the Rome Statute signed in March,” the ruler said on his Facebook page.

“I also say thank you for respecting and accepting the views of the Conference of Rulers.”

Would it be wrong to remove 'first'? To me, 'ahead of'' suffices, making 'first' redundant?

Thanks.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 321 • Replies: 4
No top replies

 
maxdancona
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 7 Apr, 2019 07:11 am
@tanguatlay,
No, it would not be grammatically incorrect to remove "first".

However, I think that if it is spoken the word "first" adds emphasis, particularly if there is a pause. I might add a comma.

".... the government will always put public welfare first, ahead of political expediency."
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Apr, 2019 04:30 pm
@tanguatlay,
You could remove it without changing the meaning, but adding it increases the emphasis. It's a rhetorical device that makes it sound more powerful.
0 Replies
 
tanguatlay
 
  1  
Reply Sun 7 Apr, 2019 09:31 pm
Thanks to both of you.
0 Replies
 
rajvardhansharma
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 8 Apr, 2019 06:37 am
@tanguatlay,
nopss...
0 Replies
 
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Would it be wrong to remove 'first'?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/02/2024 at 10:28:08