the sense I used it

[GoldfishLord]

That last phrase refers to usage of “today” in the sense I used it a few paragraphs ago, meaning “these days.”
(Reference: http://blog.bleacherreport.com/2012/06/26/say-goodbye-to-today-today-why-we-use-days-of-the-week/ )
-----------------
I think that the red part should be "the sense I used it in".
I'd like to know the reason why there isn't the word "in" right after "it".

 

[probus]

My guess is that the writer preferred to avoid repeating "in". But it reads well with or without that second "in".

 

[GoldfishLord]

I'd also like to know if it's grammatical correct without that second "in".

 

[jutfrank]

It's grammatically incorrect with the second in. The sentence needs only one in.

 

[GoldfishLord]

It's grammatically incorrect with the second in. The sentence needs only one in.

I think that "the sense I used it in" is "the sense (which) I used it in".
It's hard for me to understand why it's grammatically incorrect with the second in.
I'd like to know why.

 

[Tarheel]

Why did you remove that phrase from the sentence it appears in? It's meaningless by itself. (Having read the sentence, I agree with jutfrank.)

 

[5jj]

That last phrase refers to usage of “today” in the sense I used it a few paragraphs ago, meaning “these days.”

I'd say that a more formal version of this would be That last phrase refers to usage of 'today' in the sense in which I I used it a few paragraphs ago. meaning 'these days'. This suggests to me that That last phrase refers to usage of 'today' in the sense I used it in a few paragraphs ago, meaning 'these days' is correct. I'd put 'the; before 'usage'.

 

[Phaedrus]

I think that "the sense I used it in" is "the sense (which) I used it in".
It's hard for me to understand why it's grammatically incorrect with the second in.

I think the second "in" is needed in "the sense I used it in." The second "in" is in the zero-relative clause "I used it in __," modifying "sense."

If we try to phrase the relative clause as a separate sentence, we find that we can say "I used it in that sense," but not "I used it that sense."

Also, in the related question, we can say "In what sense did you use it?" and "What sense did you use it in?" but not "What sense did you use it?"

 

[jutfrank]

Hmm. Yes, I see now that the second in is grammatical.

It's funny because it doesn't sound right to me. Phaedrus, 5jj, do you agree that it sounds odd with the second in, or is it just me? Any ideas why it might sound odd to me? Do you think it's because I'm thinking of sense like way (? in the way I used it in)?

 

[5jj]

Phaedrus, 5jj, do you agree that it sounds odd with the second in, or is it just me?

When I first read the original (without the second in) it sounded OK to me, but as soon as I inserted that in, it sounded better, and the original sounded off.

Any ideas why it might sound odd to me?

Sorry, but I don't know. There are occasions when sentences that sound grammatical to me are fairly clearly not, and the other way round.

 

[Phaedrus]

Do you think it's because I'm thinking of sense like way (? in the way I used it in)?

That's interesting, Jutfrank. When I make the "way" substitution, I too find that the need for the "in" within the relative clause disappears.

For what it's worth, Goldfishlord, we could eliminate the need for both uses of "in," as well as the need for "the sense," by using "as" or "how":

That last phrase refers to usage of “today” as I used it a few paragraphs ago, [with the] meaning “these days.”
That last phrase refers to usage of “today” how I used it a few paragraphs ago, [with the] meaning “these days.”

 

[Tdol]

For a text that tags accuracy and copy editing, I think it could have been phrased better.

 

[GoldfishLord]

That last phrase refers to usage of “today” as I used it a few paragraphs ago, [with the] meaning “these days.”
That last phrase refers to usage of “today” how I used it a few paragraphs ago, [with the] meaning “these days.”

"how I used it" (noun phrase) comes right after "today" (noun).
I'd like to know the reason why a preposition isn't needed between "today" and "how I used it"

 

[Tarheel]

It's not needed.

 

[Phaedrus]

"how I used it" (noun phrase) comes right after "today" (noun).

The phrase "how I used it," which need not be analyzed as a noun phrase, does indeed come right after "today" (which is here a reference to the word "today" rather than an actual use of the word); however, it really relates to the noun "usage," or to the noun phrase "usage of 'today.'"

I'd like to know the reason why a preposition isn't needed between "today" and "how I used it"

Excellent question. I'm going to go out on a limb. Although the phrase "how I used it" can function as a noun phrase (e.g., in "He likes how I used it"), it can also function as an adverbial clause, and that's how I'd analyze it in its modification of the noun phrase "usage of 'today,'" which is a derived nominal. Compare:

(1) He used the word how I used it.
(2) He used the word where I used it.
(3) He used the word when I used it.
(4) He used the word why I used it.

Those sentences mean different things. My point in giving those examples is to compare the syntax of the how-clause in (1) to the syntax of the where-clause in (2) and the when-clause in (3). In each case, the function of the clause is adverbial, as can be seen by the fact that the sentences answer these questions:

(1') How did he use the word?
(2') Where did he use the word?
(3') When did he use the word?
(4') Why did he use the word?

Notice that you could not grammatically add a preposition before the how, where, when, or why in any of those examples. Also, in the first three, the wh-word plays a role in both the main clause and the subordinate clause simultaneously. Semantically: He used it how1; I used it how2; how1 = how2.