vocabulary and grammar

Dear teachers,
I have some questions to ask.

No.1. We can say a clap of thunder. Can we say a burst of thunder?

No.2. We can say 'You can find the ticket news by reading the newspapers. Can we say 'the ticket news'?

No.3. This is from an error correction exercise. 'These are organizations for men and women who offer sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'. The correct answer is to use 'that' to replace 'who'. However, I think both 'that' and 'which' can replace 'who'. Am I right?

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Thank you in advance.

Jiang

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by Anonymous

Dear teachers,
I have some questions to ask.

No.1. We can say a clap of thunder. Can we say a burst of thunder?

Yes, "burst" of thunder would be correct, if not very common.

No.2. We can say 'You can find the ticket news by reading the newspapers. Can we say 'the ticket news'?

I don't know what "ticket news" is. If you mean information about some tickets, I would not use "ticket news"; "ticket information" or "information about tickets" would be better.

No.3. This is from an error correction exercise. 'These are organizations for men and women who offer sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'. The correct answer is to use 'that' to replace 'who'. However, I think both 'that' and 'which' can replace 'who'. Am I right?

First of all, changing it from "who" makes the sentence unclear. As written, the "who" clearly refers to "men and women". These organizations help men and women; the men and women offer the sports programs to the puiblic. This may not be the intent of the sentence. It is more likely that the organizations are the ones offering the programs, but the other reading is not impossible. If one changes "who" to "that", it could refer to either "organizations" or "men and women". That leaves the sentence unclear. In BE, "which" couls also be used, but in AE, "which" is mostly reserved for non-restrictive relative clauses, set off by commas. To make the sentence clearer about the organizations being the ones that offer the programs, I would change "who" to "that" and also set "for men and women" off with commas.

'These are organizations, for men and women, that offer sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'.

or

'These are organizations that offer, for men and women, sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'.

In the first case, the organizations are for men and women. In the second case, the offer is for men and women.

:wink:

[jiang]

:D
Thank you very much for your explanation. Now I see.

Have a nice weekend!

Jiang

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

Yes, "burst" of thunder would be correct, if not very common.

I don't know what "ticket news" is. If you mean information about some tickets, I would not use "ticket news"; "ticket information" or "information about tickets" would be better.

First of all, changing it from "who" makes the sentence unclear. As written, the "who" clearly refers to "men and women". These organizations help men and women; the men and women offer the sports programs to the puiblic. This may not be the intent of the sentence. It is more likely that the organizations are the ones offering the programs, but the other reading is not impossible. If one changes "who" to "that", it could refer to either "organizations" or "men and women". That leaves the sentence unclear. In BE, "which" couls also be used, but in AE, "which" is mostly reserved for non-restrictive relative clauses, set off by commas. To make the sentence clearer about the organizations being the ones that offer the programs, I would change "who" to "that" and also set "for men and women" off with commas.

'These are organizations, for men and women, that offer sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'.

or

'These are organizations that offer, for men and women, sports programs to the public at inexpensive rates'.

In the first case, the organizations are for men and women. In the second case, the offer is for men and women.

:wink:

[MikeNewYork]

Originally Posted by jiang

:D
Thank you very much for your explanation. Now I see.

Have a nice weekend!

Jiang

You're welcome. Please tell me if my explanations are too complicated. Your understanding is the most important part of this. :wink:

[jiang]

:)
Dear Mike,

I fully understood it after I read it extremely carefully and slowly the first time and I read it second time to see if I understood it. I am sure I understand it now. I wouldn't hesitate to ask you to explain what I don't understand. It's true, really.

Thank you very much for your responsible attitude towards us. We non-native speakers are really lucky to have access to you dear teachers.

Have a nice weekend!

Jiang

Originally Posted by MikeNewYork

You're welcome. Please tell me if my explanations are too complicated. Your understanding is the most important part of this. :wink:

[MikeNewYork]

[quote="jiang"]:)
Dear Mike,

I fully understood it after I read it extremely carefully and slowly the first time and I read it second time to see if I understood it. I am sure I understand it now. I wouldn't hesitate to ask you to explain what I don't understand. It's true, really.

Thank you very much for your responsible attitude towards us. We non-native speakers are really lucky to have access to you dear teachers.

Have a nice weekend!

Jiang

Thanks, Jiang. I just wanted to make certain. :wink: