He implied someone for something he did.

Status
Not open for further replies.

MeyaN

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Telugu
Home Country
India
Current Location
India
He implicated someone for something he did.

Here the second 'he' can both mean the first 'He' as well as second 'he'. How do I disambiguate this?
 
Last edited:
He implied someone for something he did.

Here the second 'he' can both mean the first 'He' as well as second 'he'. How do I disambiguate this?

teechar already caught "implied"...

For reasons of common usage, and for the logic of the sentence, I read this as "he" being unambiguously the same person. If I wanted the second "he" to refer to "someone", I'd replace "he" with "they".
 
Yeah, it was implicated. Sorry.

'If I wanted the second "he" to refer to "someone", I'd replace "he" with "they".'
Can we do it so, ChinaDan? Because singular 'someone' would be replaced by collective pronoun 'they'. Please explain.
 
'If I wanted the second "he" to refer to "someone", I'd replace "he" with "they".'
Can we do it so, ChinaDan? Because singular 'someone' would be replaced by collective pronoun 'they'. Please explain.

Piscean got that; Post #5. In this age of hyper political correctness, it has become acceptable to use "they" instead of a singular gender-specific pronoun.
 
"He implicated someone else for something they did." Is this sounding natural? Is it obvious from the sentence that 'they' is referring to 'someone'?

Just to make myself 100% clear.

Thank you.

PS: I hope it's okay to use 'myself' instead of 'me' above for I was trying to make myself clear by your reply.
 
?

Just to make myself 100% clear.

Thank you.

PS: I hope it's okay to use 'myself' instead of 'me' above for I was trying to make myself clear by your reply.

Yes, that's perfect.
 
"Context is king!"
Shouldn't there be 'the' before king, Teechar?

Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top