... far more birds than I thought [were] in my immediate vicinity

[chenmoai]

Sitting in my backyard, I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than I thought were in my immediate vicinity. OR Sitting in my backyard, I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than I thought in my immediate vicinity.Which is correct?Is the "were" needed or not?

 

[5jj]

You need the 'were' to complete the sense of what you want to say.

 

[emsr2d2]

1. Sitting in my backyard, I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than I thought were in my immediate vicinity. OR
2. Sitting in my backyard, I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than I thought in my immediate vicinity.

Which is correct? space needed here Is the "were" needed or not?

Please note my improvements to your layout above. Whenever you give us more than one sentence to look at, number them. Leave appropriate spaces between lines so you're not just putting out a big block of text.

 

[chenmoai]

Please note my improvements to your layout above. Whenever you give us more than one sentence to look at, number them. Leave appropriate spaces between lines so you're not just putting out a big block of text.

Got it. Thanks for your reminding. Can I have your opinion on my question?

 

[emsr2d2]

Got it. Thanks for your the reminding reminders. Can I have your opinion on my question?

5jj answered your question and three of us have hit "Like" on his response, indicating our agreement. We don't add a new response when we agree with someone else; we just add a "Like". It saves time for everyone. That's also why we ask users not to add a new post to say "Thanks" to anyone. On that basis, I have deleted your last post. You should simply add "Like" or "Thanks" to 5jj's post to indicate your understanding and gratitude.

 

[chenmoai]

You need the 'were' to complete the sense of what you want to say.

But why are two verbs placed here? What's the function of the "were" here? I can't explain why. But I also feel the "were" is needed here.

 

[jutfrank]

The sentence is ungrammatical without were, which functions as a copula. I wonder if the following helps:

I thought [X birds] were in my immediate vicinity.
(I'm) surprised to encounter far more birds than [X birds].

Another way to expand the thought is like this:

I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than [the number of birds which] I thought were in my immediate vicinity.

 

[Barque]

I'm not really sure it's ungrammatical without the second "were".

I never cease to be pleasantly surprised to encounter far more birds than I thought were in my immediate vicinity.
This could be read as "... than I thought [to be] in my immediate vicinity".

I agree it reads better with the second "were" though.

 

[emsr2d2]

I don't find it grammatical without "were", with "thought". If you change "thought" to "expected", omitting "were" is OK.

 

[Barque]

Compare "I thought him unpleasant" or "I thought him in the vicinity".