embrace v. include v. contain v. involve [course embraces aspects]

hhtt

Senior Member
Turkish
"This course embraces several different aspects of psychology."

Above is the original sentence. Which of the followings have the exact meaning of it

1) This course involves several different aspects of psychology.

2) This course includes several different aspects of psychology.

3) This course contains several different aspects of psychology.


Source: Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
  • hhtt

    Senior Member
    Turkish
    "Much of our discussion has been about diatomic combinations that involve only two atoms."

    Above is the original.

    Which of the following has the exact meaning of it?

    1. Much of our discussion has been about diatomic combinations that contain only two atoms.
    2. Much of our discussion has been about diatomic combinations that include only two atoms.
    3. Much of our discussion has been about diatomic combinations that embrace only two atoms.

    Source:Elements of Material Science and Engineering by Van Vlack.

    Thank you.
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    "Exact", huh? :)

    Did you intend to omit a comma after "that" in the original sentence, or was it never there? If it was never there, your sentence excludes the discussion of diatomic combinations that involve more than two atoms:) (Perhaps combinations of two types of atoms - like water has hydrogen and oxygen but there are three total atoms in the combination molecule).

    Possibly, you meant (or the author meant)
    " ... combinations, that/which involve only two atoms." in which the words after the comma serve to provide additional information to explain what is mesnt by (all) "diatomic combinations". If it is the second (the one with the comma) then "contain" is the best match for that definition.
     

    hhtt

    Senior Member
    Turkish
    "Exact", huh? :)

    Did you intend to omit a comma after "that" in the original sentence, or was it never there? If it was never there, your sentence excludes the discussion of diatomic combinations that involve more than two atoms:) (Perhaps combinations of two types of atoms - like water has hydrogen and oxygen but there are three total atoms in the combination molecule).

    Possibly, you meant (or the author meant)
    " ... combinations, that/which involve only two atoms." in which the words after the comma serve to provide additional information to explain what is mesnt by (all) "diatomic combinations". If it is the second (the one with the comma) then "contain" is the best match for that definition.
    It is just a simple relative clause and relative clauses do not require a comma. Yes, I think the author mentions about two atoms and there was no comma.

    Thank you.
     

    JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    Defining and non defining relative clauses (2)

    Post #2 in that thread explains
    "It would probably be helpful for you to look at some of the other threads about that which.

    Normally, a relative clause that is a non-defining clause is separated from the rest of the sentence by commas. It begins with "which".
    A relative clause that is a defining clause is not separated from the rest of the sentence by commas. It begins with "that".

    Some people are not concerned about the choice between that and which, but as far as I recall, everyone agrees that the punctuation difference is essential."
    Without a comma, you can distinguish between these two where the discussions are restricted to two, or more than two, respectively:

    "Much of our discussion has been about diatomic combinations that involve only two atoms."

    "The next part of our discussion will be about diatomic combinations that involve more than two atoms."
     
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >
    Top