-1

Consider this sentence:

He carried the taxed grain in large ship in 1863 to pass the water channel with the sea men and officials to leave the daily situation as the record in simply ways like the navigational journal.

I don't get why "to pass" is followed by the year on the sentence. I suppose after the year remarked, the sentence should have been ended for better structure of the context. And same with the "to leave" too.

Seems the "simply" is used in a wrong way clearly

I think I need to separate this long sentence like this:

He carried the taxed grain in large ship in 1863. Passing the water channel with the sea men and officials, he left the daily situation as the record in simple ways like the navigational journal.

How about this?? Would it get better??

or does the prior sentence structure have some other grammatical issue and intention I have missed ??

  • 3
    This is way beyond my level of expertise, but it might be helpful to others if you could give the source. – Mick Oct 23 '16 at 3:44
0

It's not clear to me what the writer of this sentence is trying to say, so it's difficult to give advice on how to say it correctly.

"He carried the tax grain in large ship in 1863". Ok, this part is clear. Note that "ship" is a singular countable noun, so it should have an article. Probably "in a large ship" is intended.

"to pass the water channel with the sea men and officials" Are you trying to say that the reason for carrying the grain in a large ship was to pass the water channel? Or do you mean that this was the next event to happen: he put the grain on the ship and then passed the water channel? I'm also not clear what the role of the "seamen and officials" is here. Are you just trying to say that they accompanied him when he passed the channel? That they were on the shores of the channel as he passed? That they had something to do with the "daily situation"? Or what?

By the way, "seamen" is one word. And "water channel" is redundant and awkward. While the word "channel" has a number of meanings, "water channel" is not a standard way of saying that you mean the kind of channel that is a body of water. As you're talking about a ship and seamen the reader would probably assume you mean a body of water and not a TV channel or a psychic.

"to leave the daily situation as the record ..." Do you mean that he wanted to leave a record of the situation each day? But as worded, the sentence says that the purpose for passing the channel was to leave the daily situation, which I don't think is what you mean.

So putting that all together, perhaps what you (or whoever wrote the original sentence) meant to say was:

He carried the taxed grain in a large ship in 1863. He passed the channel where the seamen and officials were standing. (Maybe that's what you meant.) He kept a record of the daily situation in simple ways, like writing in a navigational journal.

  • Thanks first. And seems you got the point of the parts. I will give you the link the original one exists, though it seems obvious that the original one also has some errors as it is. Just you can check it. It seems the seamen and the officials were the member of the journey, carrying the taxed grains. And the person, I called it "he" at the beginning of the sentence, has his own name in the original one. I changed it for convenience's sake. knmm.or.kr/eng/Menu03_Relic/relic_01_View04.aspx – Sam Oct 23 '16 at 9:21
  • 3
    There are a number of errors in the English on that web page. Apparently whoever wrote it is not fluent in English. For the most part you can figure out what he meant, but that sentence is tricky and requires some guessing. (Well, his English is better than my Korean, which is non-existent, so ...) – Jay Oct 25 '16 at 13:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.