Is this sentence correct ?

[duiter]

Dear all,

Is this sentence correct and natural ?


In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live in if every nations should be willing to provide an assistance to its neighbors.

Many thanks

 

[SlickVic9000]

(Not a Teacher)

"In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live in if every nation [STRIKE]s[/STRIKE] [STRIKE]should[/STRIKE] would be willing to provide [STRIKE]an[/STRIKE] assistance to its neighbor."

 

[jegan0825]

NOT A TEACHER!

Dear all,

Is this sentence correct and natural ?


In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live in if every nations should be willing to provide an assistance to its neighbors.

Many thanks

I would suggest you to use "To conclude" instead of "In conclusion" and "are willing" instead of "should/would be willing".

 

[Barb_D]

"Are willing" does not work with "if every nation."

 

[jegan0825]

Yeah! Guess i missed that! Sorry!
Then we can use "every nation is willing" instead.

 

[TheParser]

natural ?



NOT A TEACHER


I most respectfully suggest that some writing teachers would suggest that you

avoid terms like "in conclusion" or "to conclude." They feel that such terms are

unnecessary and "old-fashioned" sounding. Furthermore, I think those terms are

ambiguous. When you say "in conclusion," you could mean (a) All right. I am going

to stop talking now, or (b) The following sentence is what I think about what I have

been telling you.

If you mean (a), then some people would suggest that a speaker just conclude. To

tell the audience that you are going to stop is rather insulting. Furthermore, if you

stop talking without telling your audience ahead of time, it will be more dramatic and

leave a bigger impression on your audience.

If you mean (b), then you could possibly say something like:


The world, then, would be a much better place if every nation were willing to

help its neighbors.


P.S. It's not necessary to say "to live in"/ "in which to live" because those words

are obvious. Writing teachers, I believe, advise us to CUT out every unnecessary

word.

 

[bhaisahab]

I prefer this:
"In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live if every nation were willing to provide assistance to its neighbours."

 

[TheParser]

I most respectfully suggest that some writing teachers would suggest that you

avoid terms like "in conclusion" or "to conclude."


NOT A TEACHER


(1) An advanced learner has just sent me a private message in which the sender

says that my sentence above is poorly written (the sender used very courteous

language to get across this idea).

(2) The sender is absolutely correct. That sentence is horrible. While I was writing it,

I realized that using the verb "suggest" twice was not the best idea. The sender, however,

pointed out more serious flaws.

(3) The sender's main point was my use of the first "that." The sender pointed out that

my sentence should have read:

I most respectfully suggest what (that which) some writing teachers would suggest

is that you avoid terms like "in conclusion" and "to conclude."

(4) This is just another example to show that many learners know grammar better than

many native speakers!

EDIT: It also shows why it is imperative that non-teachers write "Not a Teacher" at the very beginning of their posts.

 

[emsr2d2]

Dear all,

Is this sentence correct and natural ?

In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live in if every nations should be willing to provide an assistance to its neighbors.

Many thanks

In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live if every nation were willing to provide assistance to its neighbours.

Edit: I have just realised that I have posted precisely the same sentence as Bhaisahab, which I managed to miss on my first read-through. Please note that I didn't just copy someone else's work!

 

[Raymott]

In conclusion, the world would be a better place to live if every nation were willing to provide assistance to its neighbours.

Edit: I have just realised that I have posted precisely the same sentence as Bhaisahab, which I managed to miss on my first read-through. Please note that I didn't just copy someone else's work!

That's OK, but how could you both leave out "in" from "a better place to live in"? Do you really both prefer, "The world would be a better place to live if ..."?

 

[emsr2d2]

That's OK, but how could you both leave out "in" from "a better place to live in"? Do you really both prefer, "The world would be a better place to live if ..."?

I do, yes.

England is a great place to live.
The block of flats on the east side of town is a terrible place to live.
This world is a fantastic place to live.

With none of those, would I say "live in" so I wouldn't use it in the OP's sentence either.

I live in London. It's a great place to live.
Would you say "I live in London. It's a great place to live in"?

 

[Raymott]

I do, yes.

England is a great place to live. Is that why you live it? I might use "in" here.
The block of flats on the east side of town is a terrible place to live. People generally live in a block of flats. I don't see an objection to "in" here, though I might leave it out.
This world is a fantastic place to live. in.

With none of those, would I say "live in" so I wouldn't use it in the OP's sentence either.

I live in London. It's a great place to live.
Would you say "I live in London. It's a great place to live in"? Probably 50/50.
If I actually lived in London, I might not, because I'd talk like other Londoners, who apparently don't use "in" here.
But I'd say, "Brisbane is a great place to live in."

Would you say, "What's London like to live?"
Would you say, "London is a great place to live. That's why I live it."?

But I would say, "The world could be a better place to live in." I was just surprised that both you and bhai chose the form without "in"
But it's no big deal.

 

[emsr2d2]

BrE vs AusE difference, perhaps.