Are these sentences natural? April 5

[musicgold]

Hi,

Are the following sentences natural to a native ear?

1. Am I out of line in saying that the nation needs a more powerful administrative service?

2. I think that there is a high probability that the company would/will come out of this situation.

3. With our borrowing cost where it is at, I don’t think it is a prudent course.

Thanks,
MG.

[luschen]

I am not an English teacher, but I do have a native ear. In my opinion, the sentences do sound natural. For sentence 2, will is the correct choice. Many native speakers would say your exact sentence for #3, but I believe the correct grammar would be:

With our borrowing cost where it is, I don't think it is a prudent course.

[musicgold]

Thanks Luschen.

2. I think that there is a high probability that the company would/will come out of this situation.

I always get confused with such sentences. I remember reading somewhere that when you are not certain about the future, use 'would'. Not sure why it doesn't work in this case. Maybe a teacher can opine.

[euncu]

***Neither a teacher nor a native-speaker.***

2. I think that there is a high probability that the company would/will come out of this situation.

.

I think the both "that"s are needless, am I right ? And as for the "would/will" couple I think they might mean different. I'd too say "will" is the correct answer, because at least my ears expect such a thing but yet "would" couldn't be incorrect since, firstly it is not ungrammatical and second it, at least here in this context, sounds like a less confidently uttered "will" .

I'll really appreciate if I'm told that my interpretations are right or not.

Thanks for your replies in advance.

[freezeframe]

***Neither a teacher nor a native-speaker.***



I think the both "that"s are needless, am I right ? And as for the "would/will" couple I think they might mean different. I'd too say "will" is the correct answer, because at least my ears expect such a thing but yet "would" couldn't be incorrect since, firstly it is not ungrammatical and second it, at least here in this context, sounds like a less confidently uttered "will" .

I'll really appreciate if I'm told that my interpretations are right or not.

Thanks for your replies in advance.

Good points. I agree on "would".

I would keep the second "that".

[luschen]

euncu, I agree that you are correct. The that in the second sentence is not needed, although a lot of native speakers might put it in anyway.

I think the key to the will/would is that it needs to match the verb tense of think. Both these sentences would be correct:


I think that there is a high probability that the company will come out of this situation.

I thought that there was a high probability that the company would come out of that situation.

The first is all happening in the present while the second all happened in the past.

[Tdol]

***Neither a teacher nor a native-speaker.***



I think the both "that"s are needless, am I right ? And as for the "would/will" couple I think they might mean different. I'd too say "will" is the correct answer, because at least my ears expect such a thing but yet "would" couldn't be incorrect since, firstly it is not ungrammatical and second it, at least here in this context, sounds like a less confidently uttered "will" .

I'll really appreciate if I'm told that my interpretations are right or not.

Thanks for your replies in advance.

I agree with your point about that, and would happily leave both out. I am less sure about would because it's a high probability- will fits better.