I am new to English language, while revising I was paraphrasing the 1st statement and got the 2nd. What I don't understand is WHY the 1st statement feels more natural while reading them when both statements are conveying essentially the same information.

Statement 1

During Aurangzeb's reign, the Mughal Empire began to deteriorate, leading to utter paralysis of the empire's administration and finances during the reigns of successive generations of Mughal emperors.

Statement 2

The process of decline of the Mughal Empire had set in during Aurangzeb's reign, which during the reign of succeeding generations of Mughal rulers led to total paralysis of administration and finances of the empire.

  • 1
    The original version tells the reader that a decline started during Aurangzeb's reign. Your version assumes that the reader knows that there was a decline and tells us when it began. The main problem is that your use of which implies that it was Aurangzeb's reign that led to paralysis. Sep 8, 2021 at 10:27
  • I concede on the first point that the first part of my sentence assumes that the reader already knows that the decline was there and my statement just tell us where it began, but I believe that ending the first half while emphasising on "deterioration" and following the next half of the sentence with "leading" in the first sentence, is essentially have the same effect as the second one with the use of 'which'.
    – harsh garg
    Sep 8, 2021 at 10:42
  • 1
    I was only trying to explain the difference between the two versions. I don't consider yours 'less natural', just slightly different - except for the "Aurangzeb's reign, which...". At the risk of being accused of 'proof-reading', I would suggest "...and, during the reigns of succeeding... Mughal rulers, it led...". Sep 8, 2021 at 12:26
  • 1
    As I said in my original comment, putting reign and which together sounds as though you mean that his reign caused the paralysis. Sep 8, 2021 at 14:01
  • 1
    The second form more clearly shows that the subject is the deterioration, rather than the reign. Consider > The deterioration of the Mughal Empire that began during Aurangzeb's reign, continued through succeeding generations of Mughal rulers and led in time to the total paralysis of administration and finances of the empire.
    – djs
    Sep 11, 2021 at 12:46


Your Answer

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

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.