In 1967 , Edgerton's side-scan sonar systems revealed a large , unusually shaped object , which Mckee believed WAS the Mary Rose.
Shouldn't this be "Mackee believed TO BE the Mary Rose"?
Can somebody please explain the grammar?
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this communityIn 1967 , Edgerton's side-scan sonar systems revealed a large , unusually shaped object , which Mckee believed WAS the Mary Rose.
Shouldn't this be "Mackee believed TO BE the Mary Rose"?
Can somebody please explain the grammar?
The sentence is fine as written. This is the ordinary way of relativizing a constituent in a subordinate content clause:
McKee believed it was the Mary Rose.
↓
which
.....................↓
↓
which McKee believed ____ was the Mary Rose
Note that a content clause with a relativized constituent is not introduced with the subordinator that.
Your paraphrase with infinitival to be is grammatical, but stilted.