Yes. I had found it hard to get at the meaning of the joke before Charlie explained it to me. Thanks for replying to my question. Richard
There are plenty of wordplay jokes out there. From Carlin's old 1970s routine, we have Cheese Fondon't. That's a food for people who don't like Cheese Fondue. Chalant. Some people are nonchalant, so chalance must exist. Why do we never hear about someone who is chalant? Near-fetched. Something that's very obvious. "Say, that's near-fetched, Bill!" All of the above, wordplay jokes, and fairly funny for those who grew up speaking English. The humor is almost near-fetched... but far-fetched for those who are unfamiliar with these terms. Please forgive the OT digression from the ruthless to the ridiculous. Charlie
sorry it took a while, richard, but i'm far behind all these other posters time-wise, being on the other side of the planet... here's how i would word that: hope that helps... hugs, m
Actually these two sentences are closely related and the two that-clauses run parallel to each other. Was it because the second that-clause too long and too complicated that you made it independent? Can we really have a subordinate clause as an independent sentence? Thanks. Richard
I'd go with the ever-popular m-dash: ...that in a ruthlessly competitive society it is always the fittest and fiercest who will survive– that in such an environment, many are forced....
Can't we combine the two sentences into one loooooooooooooooong sentence in which we will have two parallel that-clauses? Or can we add to the beginning of the second sentence led by "That" a main clause, which is similar in meaning to "Jack London shows us"? As a nonnative, I seldom dare use what I am not so sure of, like "That in such an environment,..." and your dash version. Thanks. Richard
Why? A sentence, even a compound sentence, should express a single thought. To collect more than one loosely connected thougts, use a paragraph. Compounding sentences together for the sake if making fewer sentences is a mistake. The resulting writing is harder for the reader to comprehend.
But Maia's third sentence led by "That" is obviously a dependent clause, rather than an independent clause. My grammar books teaches me that a dependent clause can never stand on its own and must be attached to a main clause. And this is why I doubted the correctness of Maia's sentence arrangement. It may be something I have never learned, and therefore, I would like you native speakers of English to enlighten me about it: Can a dependent clauses be an independent sentence? Thanks. Richard
I would drop the word "That" and capitalize "In" to solve that problem, giving you: In the novel [insert title], Jack London affirms the law of the jungle. He shows us that in a ruthlessly competitive society it is always the fittest and fiercest who will survive. In such an environment, many are forced to struggle against extremely poor living conditions and only by besting their competitors, can the top few thrive. I also think that "In such an environment" may be unnecessary, as implied by the paragraph's context. For brevity, you may be able to do: In the novel [insert title], Jack London affirms the law of the jungle. He shows us that in a ruthlessly competitive society it is always the fittest and fiercest who will survive. Many are forced to struggle against extremely poor living conditions and only by besting their competitors, can the top few thrive. Charlie
Thanks a lot, Charlie. Actually my gratitude is beyond words. You have solved every possible problem in these sentences. In this particular situation, it is cohesion that is involved and matters. If we never care about this aspect of writing, of course we can write whatever in whatever way. But that would lead to a bad style, I'm afraid. Thanks again for your great help and your patience with me. Richard
Your welcome... though mammamaia deserves the credit, she did all the work, I just tweaked what she wrote.
it doesn't have to be tweaked, but of course you can, if you like the tweaked version better... the thing is, richard, you can't let yourself be so bound by every single one of this or that grammar textbook's rules and regulations that your writing has no 'style' and you have no 'voice' as a writer... rules are ok for students to follow so rigidly in the classroom, but in writing [and teaching writing], one must know when and how some of them can be bent and yes, even broken, in order to be able to write what others can enjoy reading... so, the repeated 'that' starting a sentence is my 'style' and my 'voice'... and whether or not you think it's breaking or bending a rule, the final decision must be based on how comfortably it reads... and how well the reader can understand what it's saying... get the difference? hugs, m
