New answers tagged clauses
Since the baby does the holding (trapping) the 'him' referred to is the father. Also the baby is referred to as 'it' in the phrase "its little hand". The baby (it) traps the father (him).
Him refers to to the father. The subject of the clause is the baby and finger and father are the objects. This is the translator's ambiguity and not an English language quote by Marquez at all. This is from a poem called La Marioneta by a Mexican ventriloquist named Johnny Welch who passed the work off as that of Marquez in 2000. Here it is in Spanish ...
Here we have a typical case of an inverted result clause.If it wasn't inverted it would be written this way,"“You were so sure of your theory about them, you ignored evidence that you were wrong.” Maybe that was what confused you. So to answer your questions, yes, "so" here is an adverb, and it always introduces the main clause in result clauses. As for ...
This dependent clause is a participle carrying NP, (which is) derived from the nonrestrictive relative clause (which was) carrying NP. Relative clauses modify nouns; this one modifies the noun phrase the plane, and therefore should come immediately after it. There are several different kinds of subordinate clauses: some (complement clauses) have to go ...
The second one seems right because the first one could mean that the plane crashed due to carrying all those passengers and crew members. The second one avoids this confusion and reduces ambiguity so if I were you I would go with the second one. If you read the newspaper you will see that the second one is given more preference and you'll hardly see or hear ...
The second one. The first maybe implies that the plane crash itself carried the passengers into international waters, and that the plane wasn't necessarily carrying anything. The second just has a subordinate clause giving more information about the plane, before saying it crashed.
Top 50 recent answers are included