Food was not reduced?

Discussion in 'English Only' started by bubeepbu, Jul 4, 2012.

  1. bubeepbu Member

    Chinese
    Helo guys,

    I am trying to explain the situation in red.

    A had a lot of food. He secretly gave some to B.
    But he was suprised to find that his food was not reduced the next day.
    Can I change it to 'had not redcued'? Not sure if 'reduced' can be used to describe this situation.

    A did the same thing again. Again, the food still stay the same the next day.
    (This is actually describing the amount of food is still the same as before. But I don't think 'stay the same' is correct here.)

    This the orginal version of the story.
    http://www.topics-mag.com/folk-tales/folk-tale-brotherly-love-kor.htm

    Please advice. Thank You.
     
  2. perpend

    perpend Banned

    American English
    "reduced" really doesn't work.

    You might consider:
    His food was still there.
    His food had not been eaten.
    His food supply remained intact.
    His food supply had not been diminished.
     
  3. bubeepbu Member

    Chinese
    Hi, thanks for the prompt reply.
    But the situation is,A just gave B some of his food.
    Like, he has 10 apples, he gives B 2. He should have 8 left. But somehow, there are still 10 apples in his kitchen.
    So Sentences 1 - 3 doesnt seem correct in this situation.
     
  4. Franco-filly Senior Member

    Southern England
    English - Southern England
    His food supply had not decreased.
    He repeated his action the following day, but still his stock of food remained intact/had not diminished.

    Saying "his food was not reduced/decreased" suggest someone else was involved e.g "the prisoner's was surprised his food was not reduced" i.e the guards had not given him less despite their threats to do so the previous day.
     
  5. bubeepbu Member

    Chinese
    Thank you:)
     

Share This Page

Loading...