She became further accustomed and drawn to biology and its different areas

[Ryan.]

Is it correct and idiomatic to merge sentence A with B and write the in the form of sentence C?

A-"She became further accustomed to biology and its different areas."
B"She became drawn to biology and its different areas."
C-"She became further accustomed and drawn to biology and its different areas."

Thanks a lot.

 

[Rover_KE]

She would be be drawn to it before she became further accustomed to it.

 

[Ryan.]

She would be be drawn to it before she became further accustomed to it.

So if I reverse them, that will be OK? Regardless of the meaning of the sentence, is it grammatically correct?

"She became drawn and further accustomed to biology and its different areas."

 

[SoothingDave]

I would use two "to's." It reads odd to me either way ("drawn and accustomed to" or "accustomed and drawn to") with only one "to."

 

[Ryan.]

I would use two "to's." It reads odd to me either way ("drawn and accustomed to" or "accustomed and drawn to") with only one "to."

So would it be alright to say "She became drawn to and further accustomed to biology and its different areas." ?

 

[bhaisahab]

So would it be alright to say "She became drawn to and further accustomed to biology and its different areas." ?

It reads very odd to me with or without the "to". It seems to me that "became drawn to" and "further accustomed to" don't fit together in that sentence. One doesn't become drawn to and further accustomed to something at the same time.

 

[SoothingDave]

It reads very odd to me with or without the "to". It seems to me that "became drawn to" and "further accustomed to" don't fit together in that sentence. One doesn't become drawn to and further accustomed to something at the same time.

Yes, the "further" makes it odd.

 

[emsr2d2]

Perhaps "She was drawn to and subsequently became accustomed to ..."

 

[SoothingDave]

Yes, grammatically it is OK.