ed participle

[Anonymous]

Given the following context, which of the sentences 1 or 2 would be appropriate to use:
"We heard that there had been an accident near our place and that someone had been injured."
1-We learnt later that the person injured was Mr. X.
2-We learnt later that the injured person was Mr. X.

[Red5]

I think I would opt for number 2... We learnt later that the injured person was Mr. X.

[gwendolinest]

They are both correct.

[Red5]

They are both correct.

I agree. I'd say that they're both correct, but I feel #2 is more natural sounding for some reason. :wink:

[FW]

It seems to me that they don't really mean the same thing. I am not a native speaker and might be entirely wrong and that's why I am asking this.

A-"The man wounded" means to me the man who GOT wounded.
B-"The wounded man" means to me the man who had been wounded, who was in a wounded state.
Consider:
C-"There was a shoot-out in the street and a man got shot. The man shot was Mr. X."
I don't think you could say "the shot man", you have to say "the man who had been shot".
Now I don't know whether you could say:
D-"There was a shoot-out in the street and a man got shot. The man shot was take to the hospital."
To me it sounds OK, but I have doubts.

[Tdol]

I have no problem with 'the man shot'- it's fine. :D

[navi tasan]

But then, could we use "injured" in the same way as "shot" or couldn't we?
"I took the man injured to the hospital."

[Tdol]

I wouldn't. I'd talk about 'people injured', but by the time you're taking him to hospital, he'd have become an 'injured man' as we're no longer looking at the direct consequences of the accident.

[navi tasan]

Logical.
Thanks TDOL.

[RonBee]

I would prefer the injured man to the man shot. You could also say the victim.

8)