1

The original sentence:

If the water was moving with the wave, the ocean and everything on it would be racing in to the shore with obviously catastrophic results.

Two questions:

  1. I like to confirm that this is a complex sentence in a subjunctive mood for both the dependent and independent clauses, although it is not typical to use a continous tense in subjunctive moods.

  2. How to understand the adverb "in" after "racing"? Is it fine to use "...racing to the shore..." or "...racing into the shore..."?

Improve this question
4
  • Not sure about your first question but for your second, the answer is yes. "In to the shore" is the same as "into the shore". Basically the same as "racing to the shore" as well, although that version doesnt specify the direction (but its obvious that the water travels "in" to the shore and not "out" to it)
    – max pleaner
    Commented May 20, 2019 at 3:12
  • 1
    Into does not always mean the same thing as in to, and the use of racing in to gives a different shade of meaning than racing to. All variations are grammatical, but the meaning will change (even if only subtly). Also note that racing into the shore, specifically, is somewhat nonsensical (a shore is not typically something that encloses something else), whereas racing in to the shore makes perfect sense.
    – Jason Bassford
    Commented May 20, 2019 at 18:13
  • @JasonBassford, thanks for sharing.
    – Charlie
    Commented May 20, 2019 at 19:36
  • As for the rest of the question, it is not subjunctive because English does not have a subjunctive mood. It has several irrealis and hypothetical constructions that are often called "subjunctive", but the term is used for all sorts of things, including modal auxiliaries. Better to just ignore it, like split infinitives.
    – John Lawler
    Commented Mar 13, 2022 at 21:16

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .