ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: Wilson commission

CalifJim — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:14:08 GMT

I'll repeat it here. Perhaps you can give me some idea of what part of it seems to be giving you a problem.

(C) is the only one without any pronouns to obscure the meaning.
Also (C) is the only one that gives a reason why the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view. All the others simply mention a relation in time (when, after). The relationship between cause (dropping the proposal) and effect (the appearance of reverting to the British view) is stronger than a temporal relationship for creating coherence within a composition.

(A) when the proposal was dropped by the Wilson administration, it seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

(B) after it was dropped, the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

(C) by dropping the proposal, the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

(D) the Wilson administration dropped the proposal when it seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

(E) when they dropped the proposal, the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

In (A) it seems to refer back to the proposal, though the intent is to refer back to the Wilson administration.*

In (B) it might wrongly be taken to refer to the Wilson administration.

In (D) it might wrongly be taken to be a dummy it until you read farther.

In (E) a plural pronoun they refers to a singular noun administration, and the pronoun occurs before the "antecedent". Neither of these is wrong in itself, but given the choice of (C), a more succinct version of (E), (C) is the obvious winner.

*Actually, I have to say that I find such structures a bit incoherent, or at least poorly phrased.

Compare these, in which it refers to something other than the subject of the when clause:

When the judgment was finally handed down by the court, it adjourned for the day.

When the worm was affixed to the glass slide, it accidentally shattered into a hundred little pieces.

When the tree was struck by the car, it spun out of control and crashed against a fence.

Re: Wilson commission

MaverickK — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:06:39 GMT

Thanks Clive and Jim for your replies.
Jim, if you could give your explanation once more it would be great.

Re: Wilson commission

Clive — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:34:21 GMT

Hi,

Jim is perfectly correct when he said there is no "original" here.I was referring to the paragraph as you originally wrote it in your first post. It contained option A.

I still did not get the answer to my question - Is option A grammatically perfectly correct? Yes. I said it was fine.

Why is option C a better option than option A (a bit more lucid explanation considering me a "forum greenhorn " ) ? C is also fine, but I don't think it's really any better than A. However, California Jim prefers C, so I'll leave him to elaborate on his explanation.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: Wilson commission

MaverickK — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:28:15 GMT

Jim was correct when he said there is no "original" here. But I still did not get the answer to the question - Is option A grammatically perfectly correct? Why is option C correct while option A incorrect? please explain lucidly ( considering me a "forum greenhorn" )

Re: Wilson commission

MaverickK — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:21:13 GMT

Jim is perfectly correct when he said there is no "original" here.I still did not get the answer to my question - Is option A grammatically perfectly correct? Why is option C a better option than option A (a bit more lucid explanation considering me a "forum greenhorn " ) ?

Re: Wilson commission

Clive — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:56:08 GMT

Hi Jim,
That's what I thought.
I guess that such test have their place. But I think that, often, the student does not realize that other answers are at all possible grammatically, but instead thinks that there is 'only one correct answer'. I'm not even sure, in all cases, if the person who sets the questions even considers that other answers are at all possible.
C'est la vie.
Clive

Re: Wilson commission

CalifJim — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 20:03:31 GMT

Typically the instructions ask the student to choose the (one) "best" answer -- the implication being that they may all be correct grammatically, but that some are better than others. Sometimes semantics and sometimes stylistic considerations come into play.

Jim

Re: Wilson commission

Clive — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:49:09 GMT

Hi,

I see, thank you. I hope that such exercises come with instructions for the students, if not for us.
Is one supposed to select the phrasing that seems most likely / most common, or all that are grammatically possible?

Clive

Re: Wilson commission

CalifJim — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:15:07 GMT

Clive
adds an element of meaning that is not in the original.

Clive,

Just a "technical note". There is no "original". The task does not involve finding the best paraphrase for the words in the header.

In these exercises, answer A always appears in the header material instead of the blank line segment typical of similar exercises. Answer A has no priority over the others listed below the header, but has equal status with the other possible answers.

Re: Wilson commission

Clive — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:08:49 GMT

Hi,

I understood why B,D and E are eliminated.

I have been told that the correct answer is C. So now I can not understand why is C correct As I noted before, in C the word 'by' adds an element of meaning that is not in the original. I guess whoever is telling you that C is correct does not see that.

and A incorrect. Is it because "reverting to" has been used in the last clause,therefore "dropping the proposal" should be used instead of "proposal was dropped" in the previous clause? No. 'Revert' is used correctly in A. I don't know why someone is telling you that A is incorrect. If this is from a book, is it by a native-speaker author?

Best wishes, Clive

Re: Wilson commission

MaverickK — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:56:04 GMT

I could not completely understand this explanation. According to my understanding,even option A is giving the reason why the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view.Please explain more lucidly.

Another question - Is option A grammatically perfectly correct?

Re: Wilson commission

CalifJim — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:37:26 GMT

Also (C) is the only one that gives a reason why the Wilson administration seemed to be reverting to the British view. All the others simply mention a relation in time (when, after). The relationship between cause (dropping the proposal) and effect (the appearance of reverting to the British view) is stronger than a temporal relationship for creating coherence within a composition.

Re: Wilson commission

MaverickK — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:21:26 GMT

Thanks for your reply Clive.The colon was there in the original sentence.As for your answers,I understood why B,D and E are eliminated.I have been told that the correct answer is C. So now I can not understand why is C correct and A incorrect. Is it because "reverting to" has been used in the last clause,therefore "dropping the proposal" should be used instead of "proposal was dropped" in the previous clause? This is my understanding. Please explain.

Re: Wilson commission

Clive — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:00:21 GMT

Hi,

Please look at the following sentence.Only one of the 5 options is correct.I can not understand which one is correct and why are the remaining incorrect.

Please explain and help. Did you type a colon accicdentally, instead of a semi-colon?

In presenting his modus vivendi proposal, Lansing implied that the American government accepted the German view that armed merchant vessels were warships: however, when the proposal was dropped by the Wilson administration, it seemed to be reverting to the British view on this question.

(A) when the proposal was dropped by the Wilson administration, it This is fine.The 'it' here refers to 'the Wilson administration'.

(B) after it was dropped, the Wilson administration The 'it' here refers to 'the German view', which is not the writer's intention.

(C) by dropping the proposal, the Wilson administration This suggests that the 'dropping' was the reason for the 'seeming'. The original does not say that so explicitly.

(D) the Wilson administration dropped the proposal when it The 'it' here refers to 'the proposal', which is not the writer's intention.

(E) when they dropped the proposal, the Wilson administration This seems OK to me. It's just active instead of passive. Perhaps the 'they' could be interpreted to refer to the American government' rather than 'the Wilson administration'.

Best wshes, Clive

Wilson commission

MaverickK — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 04:30:20 GMT

Hi,

Please look at the following sentence.Only one of the 5 options is correct.I can not understand which one is correct and why are the remaining incorrect.

Please explain and help.

(A) when the proposal was dropped by the Wilson administration, it

(B) after it was dropped, the Wilson administration

(D) the Wilson administration dropped the proposal when it

(E) when they dropped the proposal, the Wilson administration