and videos it said

< Previous | Next >

HyeeWang

Senior Member
Chinese
President Chavez acted after Colombia went before the Organization of American States' permanent council in Washington to present photographs, maps, coordinates and videos it said show 1,500 leftist rebels hiding in Venezuela.

Hi, I am very confused with this sentence.
1.Please help to analyse the parts of sentence.
2. What is the relations betweeen verbs "act","went","present" and "show"?
3. What does "it" in "and videos it said" refer to?
Thanks.
context: http://www1.voanews.com/english/new...ic-Ties-with-Colombia-99043894.html?refresh=1
 
  • owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    Good question, Hyee Wang. Hugo Chavez acted. Columbia went to Washington and presented photos, etc. These photos, maps, etc. show rebels hiding.

    Finally, the "it" refers to Columbia. Columbia said that the videos, etc. show rebels hiding in Venezuela.
     

    HyeeWang

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    Thank you! owlman5.
    You are so helpful. Act is a vi verb there.
    But still 2 further questions unsolved.
    1. Why use "before"? What/who/which is before what/who/which?
    2. It seems to be more reasonable to use "which show" or "showing" than "show" there, I mean the section "and videos it said show".
     

    owlman5

    Senior Member
    English-US
    1. Columbia went before the Organization of American States = Columbia sent a speaker or speakers to stand in front of the members of the OAS and present information about rebels.

    2. You can say "...and videos which show" or "...and videos showing". By saying "...and videos it said show...", the writer tells us that Columbia said that the videos show proof that rebels are hiding in Venezuela.
     
    Last edited:

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    2. The reporter does not know whether the videos show the rebels. By including "it said" (i.e. Colombia said), the reporter makes it clear that it was Colombia (and not the reporter) who said it showed rebels. Using "Which show" and "showing" would mean the reporter knew was stating a fact that the videos showed rebels.
    In reported stories like this, you will often see such wording, distancing the reporter from allegations (made by someone else) to show it is not yet proven.
     

    HyeeWang

    Senior Member
    Chinese
    Thank you 2! I got it.
    1. Not only can "Before" indicate time relation .but space as well.
    2. It can be rephrased " and videos that it said show ..." .
    But "that" acts as the subject of "show" and should NOT be left out.
     

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    Thank you 2! I got it.
    1. Not only can "Before" indicate time relation .but space as well.
    2. It can be rephrased " and videos that it said show ..." .
    But "that" acts as the subject of "show" and should NOT be left out.
    This is the only type of situation where you can leave out a relative pronoun which is the subject of a verb - when the relative clause is introduced by "I hear" "they know" "he said" etc.

    I read a book that was very good: you need "that".

    I read a book that John said was very good: you can omit "that":
    > I read a book John said was very good.
     

    Forero

    Senior Member
    In " videos (that) it said show ...", the subordinating conjunction after said has to be omitted to avoid looking like a relative pronoun:

    Underlying sentence: It said (that) they/the videos show ...
    videos that it said that they show ... :cross:
    videos that it said that show ... :cross:
    Relative clause with that representing they/the videos: videos that it said show ... :tick:

    The relative pronoun can also be omitted here because there is no ambiguity. In contrast, the sentence about the book would be confusing without the relative pronoun:

    I read a book was very good.
    = I read that a book was very good. :tick:
    = :cross: I read a book that was very good.
     

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    I agree with you, Forero, but I think that's a different point: HyeeWang was asking about omission of the (subject) relative pronoun "that = which" not the subordinator "that"....
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top