. . . . his sons took over the company and later his grandchildren (one of whom

Cholo234

Senior Member
American English
Subject sentence (the names have been changed): After Smith's death in 1941, his sons took over the company and later his grandchildren (one of whom, Henry Smith, is company chairman).

Is the subject sentence grammatically correct? (I believe the subjects of the sentence should be closer together, shouldn't they?)

By closer, I mean the sentence would read as follows: After Smith's death in 1941, his sons and later his grandchildren (one of whom, Henry Smith, is company chairman) took over the company.
 
  • SReynolds

    Senior Member
    Hungarian
    The first sentence sounds to me as if the last part was added as an afterthought. For what it's worth, I do prefer the second one, it's a lot easier to parse.

    I can't really tell if there's anything wrong with the first one grammatically, but I think you can make a point that it's a form of ellipsis (his sons took over the company and later his grandchildren [took over the company]).
     

    Andygc

    Senior Member
    British English
    The first sentence is nonsense. The ellipsis is not acceptable.

    "After Smith's death in 1941, his sons took over the company and later his grandchildren." How could his sons take over his grandchildren?

    The second sentence works, but I would add two commas: "After Smith's death in 1941, his sons, and later his grandchildren (one of whom, Henry Smith, is company chairman), took over the company." I also suggest the parenthetic text should read "... Smith, is now company ...". However, the sentence would be better rewritten as two sentences, the first dealing with Smith and sons, and the second dealing with the grandchildren.
     

    Cholo234

    Senior Member
    American English
    . . . . thanks to both responders. The more I access Wikipedia, the more I understand how it is a work in progress. (The example was from Wikipedia.)
     
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >
    Top