 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2009Help with sentence
"The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but effective self-replicating structure, whose descendants’ methods of self-replication grew increasingly elaborate". I'm not sure I like this sentence. It hurts my mental tongue. I'm on to something but it hurts. Also, I'd like to add that only some of the descendants evolves along those lines. But, I don't like " some the descendents of whom's methods ". Can anybody unmuddle me? --Iain On 22 Jan 2009, Iain wrote > "The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a > simple but effective self-replicating structure, whose [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I'm not sure I like this sentence. It hurts my mental tongue. > I'm on to something but it hurts. I think an organism would "have had" a self-replicating structure, rather than "have been" one, but other than that I don't have a problem with the sentence. > Also, I'd like to add that only some of the descendants evolves > along those lines. But, I don't like " some the descendents of > whom's methods ". How about placing the "some" qualification further along: "The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but effective self-replicating structure, whose descendants' methods of self-replication sometimes grew increasingly elaborate".  SignatureCheers, Harvey CanEng and BrEng, indiscriminately mixed > "The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but > effective self-replicating structure, whose descendants’ methods of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Can anybody unmuddle me? The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but effective self-replicating structure, some of whose descendants evolved increasingly elaborate methods of self-replication. -- > > "The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but > > effective self-replicating structure, whose descendants’ methods of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > effective self-replicating structure, some of whose descendants > evolved increasingly elaborate methods of self-replication. Some of the original organism? I thought of that, and that's how I took it. --Iain Iain Inkster: >>> "The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but >>> effective self-replicating structure, whose descendants' methods of >>> self-replication grew increasingly elaborate". >>> ...I'd like to add that only some of the descendants evolves along >>> those lines. But, I don't like " some the descendents of whom's >>> methods ". Bert Hutchings: >> The original organism is commonly supposed to have been a simple but >> effective self-replicating structure, some of whose descendants >> evolved increasingly elaborate methods of self-replication. Iain Inkster: > Some of the original organism? No, some of the descendants. Of course, all of the *other* descendants died out, but you don't need to go into that here. > I thought of that, and that's how I took it. You mistook it. Bert's version is good. The last part could be shortened a bit by dropping the repeat of "self-"; it's reasonably obvious in this context. SignatureMark Brader | "Design an idiot-proof system, and the universe Toronto | will spontaneously evolve a higher grade of idiot msb@vex.net | that is able to circumvent it." My text in this article is in the public domain. On Jan 22, 10:05 pm, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote: > On 22 Jan 2009, Iain wrote > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > methods of self-replication sometimes grew increasingly > elaborate". That sounds much better. But now i've found another problem with my sentence. No single descendant's method grew more elaborate than it used to be, as a boy. In truth, they were born elaborate. Some were incrementally more elaborate than their forefathers. --Iain > On Jan 22, 10:05 pm, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > as a boy. In truth, they were born elaborate. Some were incrementally > more elaborate than their forefathers. Maybe your sentence fits into the context you've got, but the context that comes to my mind is that you're telling the story of evolution. In that case, I don't see the need for the subordination with "whose"-- the increasing elaboration of the descendants isn't something you're saying about the original organism, but rather the next step in the story. So as a shot in the dark, maybe it should be two sentences. "Among its descendants, a very few had slightly more elaborate and more effective methods of self-replication. Eventually..." -- Jerry Friedman On Jan 22, 10:52 pm, "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com" <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jan 22, 10:05 pm, HVS <use...@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > "Among its descendants, a very few had slightly more elaborate and > more effective methods of self-replication. Eventually..." The emphatic point is that self-replication is central to whole whole thing -- all organisms replicate with roughly equal efficiency, but where they vary is in their methods. --Iain > On Jan 22, 10:52 pm, "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com" > [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > thing -- all organisms replicate with roughly equal efficiency, but > where they vary is in their methods. But was that first self-replicator as efficient as modern organisms? Anyway, my whole point is that you might consider making it two sentences. -- Jerry Friedman On Jan 23, 4:08 pm, "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com" <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > On Jan 22, 10:52 pm, "jerry_fried...@yahoo.com" > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] > > But was that first self-replicator as efficient as modern organisms? Yes. > Anyway, my whole point is that you might consider making it two > sentences. Ok. --Iain |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.