After set to function, [acceptable?]

i14d14

Senior Member
Chinese
After the system is set to function A, it halts.

could we omit the Subject and Be at the same time, let it become

After set to function A, the system hats. ?

does it meet the grammar?
 
Last edited:
  • Andygc

    Senior Member
    British English
    No, because there is nothing for "it" to refer to. If there was more context, surrounding text for example, it might be possible. There has to be an antecedent (a noun or noun phrase appearing earlier in the text) to define what "it" means.
     

    Cagey

    post mod (English Only / Latin)
    English - US
    No, it doesn't.
    You need a subject and a verb. You can't omit the system [subject] and is [verb].

    Cross-posted.
     

    i14d14

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    No, it doesn't.
    You need a subject and a verb. You can't omit the system [subject] and is [verb].

    Cross-posted.
    what you said doesn't make any sense

    For example:
    After the system is set to function A, it halts.
    After being set to function A, the system halts.

    I convert the Clause into a Phrase.

    and it is legitimate because we still have the Subject[the system] and Verb[halts]


    what i'm trying to figure out is,

    if we can use a past participle to connect relative clause

    E.G: That's the girl called Nancy.

    can we use a past participle to connect that kind of clause?
     
    Last edited:

    Andygc

    Senior Member
    British English
    Please write in English. "legit" and "P.P." are not English. You are able to edit your post.

    Andygc, moderator
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top