 |
 | 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 / February 2010The one/that
1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years ago. 2. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble the one of 20 years ago. Which answer is preferable in terms of style, etc, as you see it? Reasons? Of course, both are found out there. --- Thanks. Marius Hancu > 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years > ago. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Which answer is preferable in terms of style, etc, as you see it? > Reasons? Of course, both are found out there. I would slightly prefer the first. But it's very close, and each is perfectly acceptable. Regards Jonathan Marius Hancu asks about: > 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years > ago. > 2. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble the one of 20 years > ago. Both versions seem unidiomatic to me, but I think 2 is worse. I'd probably use "the city of 20 years ago"; if I was going to vary the wording to avoid the repetition, I'd rather vary the first use of "the city" than the second one. The sentence is repetitive in another way: the "and" clause mostly just restates the first part. I'd be inclined to drop "and" and use a colon instead of a comma, or just drop the "has changed, and" bit altogether, or some other variation like that.  SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "The E-Mail of the species is more deadly msb@vex.net | than the Mail." -- Peter Neumann My text in this article is in the public domain. > Marius Hancu asks about: > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > My text in this article is in the public domain. I agree with Mark, as usual. I'd add that there are other options that seem less odd than these. For instance you could use a relative clause instead of a nominal: The city has changed from what it was 20 years ago. or you could use a semicolon instead of a conjunction: The city has changed; it was different 20 years ago. -John Lawler http://www.umich.edu/~jlawler/aue Ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile. 'Art is long, life is short, crises are fleeting, experience is perilous, and decisions are difficult.' -- Hippocrates John Lawler: > I agree with Mark, as usual. Yeee-ha! SignatureMark Brader "One doesn't have to be a grammarian Toronto to know when someone's talking balls." msb@vex.net --John Masters > > > 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years > > > ago. [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > The city has changed; it was different 20 years ago. Thank you, Professor Lawler. Marius Hancu > > 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years > > ago. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > a colon instead of a comma, or just drop the "has changed, and" bit > altogether, or some other variation like that. I have to say I can't but agree to your obs, but if you were to choose between 1 and 2, what would you do? I'm interested esp in "that" vs. "the one" aspect here. Do you feel any subtle difference? Thank you all. Marius Hancu Marius Hancu: >>> 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years >>> ago. >>> 2. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble the one of 20 years >>> ago. Mark Brader: >> Both versions seem unidiomatic to me, but I think 2 is worse. Marius Hancu: > I have to say I can't but agree to your obs, but if you were to choose > between 1 and 2, what would you do? Objection, the witness has already answered that question. > I'm interested esp in "that" vs. "the one" aspect here. > Do you feel any subtle difference? I feel that this use of "that" is rather formal. It not only sounds a bit pompous, but it clashes with the use of the contraction "doesn't". SignatureMark Brader "You can do this in a number of ways. Toronto IBM chose to do all of them... msb@vex.net why do you find that funny?" --D. Taylor My text in this article is in the public domain. >>> 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years >>> ago. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > between 1 and 2, what would you do? I'm interested esp in "that" vs. > "the one" aspect here. Do you feel any subtle difference? Using "the one" sounds a bit more informal to me, but it doesn't quite feel at home in that sentence. It would sound more natural in something like: The city has changed; it's not like the one I knew 20 years ago. The first sentence is more like I'd expect to see in a formal report or article. SignatureRegards John for mail: my initials plus a u e at tpg dot com dot au > >>> 1. The city has changed, and it doesn't resemble that of 20 years > >>> ago. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > The first sentence is more like I'd expect to see in a formal report or > article. Thanks. Marius Hancu |
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.