Hans51 Posted 14 years ago
Grammar
Eureka!!!
Teachers!!! Please look at me!! I have realized that we can not say that collateral[attendant] circumstances come from non-defining relative clauses, so they are in a different grammar category? If this is right, I am free from it.
Scree, which abounds in the Rocky Mountains, has its origins in the ice ages.
-> Scree, abounding in the Rocky Mountains, has its origins in the ice ages.
And the meaning of this sentence is not related to a collateral circumstance. Am I right? Then what conjunction do you think is needed for the sentence? Thank you so much and I am really thankful for your help as usual.
Scree, which abounds in the Rocky Mountains, has its origins in the ice ages.
-> Scree, abounding in the Rocky Mountains, has its origins in the ice ages.
And the meaning of this sentence is not related to a collateral circumstance. Am I right? Then what conjunction do you think is needed for the sentence? Thank you so much and I am really thankful for your help as usual.
Top answer
Scree, which abounds in the Rocky Mountains , has its origin in the ice ages. Scree, abundant in the Rocky Mountains , has its origin in the ice ages. And the meaning of this sentence is not related to a collateral circumstance.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0
Scree, which abounds in the Rocky Mountains, has its origin in the ice ages.
Scree, abundant in the Rocky Mountains, has its origin in the ice ages.
And the meaning of this sentence is not related to a collateral circumstance. Am I right?-- Since you have seemingly elected to start a new thread— both of the underlined seem like 'collateral ci
Scree, abundant in the Rocky Mountains, has its origin in the ice ages.
And the meaning of this sentence is not related to a collateral circumstance. Am I right?-- Since you have seemingly elected to start a new thread— both of the underlined seem like 'collateral ci
00
Thank you, so you do not agree with which abounds-> abounding.? And when they turn back to the original sentences, what conjunction do you think is needed? And? While? Because?
00
...so you do not agree with which abounds-> abounding.?-- No. It sounds wrong because a proper adjective ('abundant') is available.
And when they turn back to the original sentences, what conjunction do you think is needed? -- What original sentences? I have no idea what those might be. These are the only original sentences that I see:
Scree, which abounds
And when they turn back to the original sentences, what conjunction do you think is needed? -- What original sentences? I have no idea what those might be. These are the only original sentences that I see:
Scree, which abounds
0