Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    mrmvp is offline Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Arabic
      • Home Country:
      • United Arab Emirates
      • Current Location:
      • United Arab Emirates
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    385

    When to omit indirect object

    The teacher told me you have to omit the word "them" and "were" which are in red. Why I should omit them? Are they redundant or grammatically incorrect? and when to omit indirect object ?

    One thousand soldiers were ready. After seven days, the king decided to march towards Persia and attack them during dawn. He had developed a terrific plan to conquer Persia. At the start of the battle, ten thousand scout cavalries had been ready on Persia's border, 50 thousand infantries were on the front lines,and the rest were on the back line.





    Thank you.

  2. #2
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    74,047

    Re: When to omit indirect object

    I would use attack at dawn. If we already know the name of the enemy, I don't see what is wrong with using them, but if this is the complete text, then I too would omit it. I would use there were 50,000 infantry on the front line(s).

  3. #3
    Lynxear's Avatar
    Lynxear is offline Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    492

    Re: When to omit indirect object

    I would eliminate "them" as well. It almost seems to me that "them" refers back to the one thousand soldiers. So I agree with Tdol that "attack at dawn" is better.

    I don't like the last sentence at all.

    "Ten thousand scout cavalries had been ready on Persia's border" is very confusing. Are they still ready? Where are the front and back lines, at the border?? How many does "the rest" refer to?
    Experience is recognizing a mistake the second time you make it.
    You don't go to an Englishman when you want good pierogi.

    - Wisdom from my father

  4. #4
    mrmvp is offline Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Arabic
      • Home Country:
      • United Arab Emirates
      • Current Location:
      • United Arab Emirates
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    385

    Re: When to omit indirect object

    Quote Originally Posted by Lynxear View Post
    I would eliminate "them" as well. It almost seems to me that "them" refers back to the one thousand soldiers. So I agree with Tdol that "attack at dawn" is better.

    I don't like the last sentence at all.

    "Ten thousand scout cavalries had been ready on Persia's border" is very confusing. Are they still ready? Where are the front and back lines, at the border?? How many does "the rest" refer to?
    Thank you.

    I mentioned the details earlier in the story. Yes, they are on Persia's border. The rest refers to the army.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •