gerund

[navi tasan]

Which is correct:

1-Readers occupy the position of having insight into unraveling the mystery which the narrator lacks.
2-Readers occupy the position of having insight into the unraveling of the mystery which the narrator lacks.

[5jj]

Which is correct:

1-Readers occupy the position of having insight into unraveling the mystery which the narrator lacks.
2-Readers occupy the position of having insight into the unraveling of the mystery which the narrator lacks.

Both are acceptable.

Although there is not really much possibility of ambiguity, I would prefer to be absolutely clear by writing (in both):

Readers occupy the position of having insight, which the narrator lacks, into ...

I think I'd also write 'an insight' and, being British, I would write 'unravelling, though your spelling is fine in AmE.

[navi tasan]

Thanks a lot.

Apparently I have a real problem with this.

Would you say:

3-They had knowledge of robbing the bank.
meaning They had knowledge about its being robbed.

To me 3 means they had knowledge about how to rob it.

4-They had insight into robbing the bank.

This again to me would mean they had insight as regards how the bank could be robbed, not how it was robbed.
It might seem that I am disagreeing with you, but actually, I am confused.

Maybe "insight into unravelling" does not mean "insight into the unravelling that has been done" but "insight for the unravelling that is to be done"?

[Tdol]

3- This sentence is straining things a bit; it's creating any ambiguity by its very unnaturalness. I would say something like They knew about the bank being robbed to imply that they had information about the robbery and They knew about robbing banks to say that they knew how to go about robbing a bank.