+0
I read that 'as to' is an awkward construction that should be avoided in writing and replaced with 'about' or should require the sentence to be re-written.

Which is the best version and why?

a) There is no confusion as to what is the antecedent of the relative clause.

b) There is no confusion about what is the antecedent of the relative clause.

c) There is no confusion about what the antecedent of the relative clause is.

Which is the best version and why?

1) There is no confusion as to whether the sentence should be re-written or not.

2) There is no confusion about whether the sentence should be re-written or not.

Thanks
1 2 3
Comments  (Page 2) 
Gleb_ChebrikoffRespectfully, Gleb Chebrikoff
I understood your view the first time you mentioned it, GC.Emotion: smile There are lots of differences in grammatical terminology and analysis. I have noticed that on numerous occasions during the years I have been a member of EF. There isn't much point in going into any further details about these in this post. I have mentioned quite a few in my posts over the years.

That may occasionally even cause minor problems for some people asking questions. A Scandinavian or a person from Central Europe might be puzzled by some terms used by native speakers of English, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if some of my terms were unfamiliar or unintelligible to Brits and Americans.

CB
Cool BreezeHowever, as what begins an indirect question, I would change the word order: There is no confusion as to what the antecedent of the relative clause is

Could you, CB, or anyone else, please explain why 'is' needs to go there, instead of here:

There is no confusion as to what the antecedent of the relative clause is

I thought the verb could be moved earlier in the sentene. I know I'm wrong. But why?
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Thanks for understanding, CB Emotion: smile! The exerpts were provided for the sole purpose of giving further guidance to students who may find them useful for grasping terminology behind widely recognised linguistic works of different periods, and we are surely free to have our own vision of the terms insofar as it reflects reality.

To English 1b3: please have a look at the quotation from Martin Hewings about the positioning of 'be'.

GC
Gleb_ChebrikoffTo English 1b3: please have a look at the quotation from Martin Hewings about the positioning of 'be'.

I would, but it has come out blank on my page. Emotion: sad
English 1b3I would, but it has come out blank on my page.
I'll butt in while you wait for Gleb's response.

What you can't see says, basically, that you can put the linking verb be in either position.

I asked who the winner was.
I asked who was the winner.

CJ

Edit: OK. There he is. Never mind!
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Plain text:

We usually put the subject before the verb in the wh-, if-, or whether-clause:
• 'Have you seen Paul recently?' --- • She wanted to know if I had seen Paul recently.

However, if the original question begins what, which, or who followed by be + complement, we
can put the complement before or after be in the report:

• 'Who was the winner?' —> I asked who the winner was. (or ...who was the winner. )
There is no confusion as to what the antecedent of the relative clause is.

There is no confusion as to what is the antecedent of the relative clause

If I've understood correctly, then either version is correct, not just the former as CB said...
English 1b3If I've understood correctly, then either version is correct, not just the former as CB said...
More correctly this should read:

If I've understood correctly, then either version is correct according to Martin Hewings, not just the former as CB said ...

CJ
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
So you are saying Martin could be wrong, or CB could be? I must admit, CB's rewite with the verb at the end sounds less strained, more commonplace, to my deceiving ears, anyway.

(I would like to make one thing clear to everyone. I admit that I know next to nothing about English. My writing is poor; my grammar is no better. I sometimes question the answers I am provided, not because I question the responder's credibility, nor the answers given, but rather because I feel this is the best way for me to learn why the answers given are correct.)
Show more