Fish can mistakenly take in oil and get ill.

optimistic pessimist

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Member Type
Native Language
Japanese
Home Country
Japan
Current Location
Japan
In "Fish can mistakenly ingest oil and get ill." "ingest" is a low-frequency and unfamiliar word for many English learners. So, instead of using ingest, it is correct to use "eat" or"take in"?
 
Can you cite the source of that sentence, please?
 
In "Fish can mistakenly ingest oil and get ill no full stop here", "ingest" is a low-frequency and unfamiliar word for many English learners. So, instead of using "ingest", it is correct to use "eat" or"take in"?
Note my punctuation corrections above.
 
This is from a reading textbook titled ”Power Reading 3". "...Pollution is another reason animals become endangered. Many animals are very sensitive to what is in the water and air. Oil spills in oceans can make animals sick if they ingest the oil. It can burn their skin..." My question is if the "ingest" could be paraphrased by "take in" or other verbs including phrasal verbs.
 
From the context you've given, it seems to me the idea is that the toxic chemicals are ingested via the fish's food, which is contaminated with oil particles. That's just an educated guess. I don't really know.
 
So, can "ingest" be paraphrased by "take in"? Or is "eat" or"drink" closer in meaning?
 
So, can "ingest" be paraphrased replaced by "take in" no question mark here or is "eat" or"drink" closer in meaning?
Both "eat" and "drink" suggest at least some element of purpose. However, "ingest" makes it clearer that the fish might end up with oil in its system accidentally (by eating something else that has been contaminated with oil).

I don't recommend that learners try to start sentences with "Or".

Changing one word for another (even if it's a phrasal verb) isn't really paraphrasing.
 
Back
Top