Results 1 to 2 of 2

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    GoodTaste is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    2,577

    who was not involved in researching the new paper

    Should "who was not involved in researching the new paper" be "who was not involved in the research"? Because everyone, including you and I, read the new paper would be involved in researching the paper - reading it, delving into it and finding its advantage and disadvantage...that is, we are researching the new paper - but we are not involved in the research which includes designing, making experiments and writing the paper etc..


    ----------------
    Behavioral and social sciences professor and director of Brown University’s Mindfulness Center Eric Loucks, who was not involved in researching the new paper, agrees there are multiple definitions of mindfulness. But it is the trickiness in bringing a rich spiritual concept into a standardized framework for testing and advising patients that he feels might be tough to tackle.

    Source: Scientific American

  2. #2
    Tarheel's Avatar
    Tarheel is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    23,408

    Re: who was not involved in researching the new paper

    Yes, it means he (Professor Loucks) was not involved in the research. However, changing the phrase in bold does not make sense to me.

Posting Permissions

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