passive form or to have been extinct?

nima_persian

Banned
persian(فارسی)
Original: Extracted from Free Dictionary :"the Wollemi pine found in Australia is a surviving specimen of a conifer thought to have been long extinct and therefore known as a living fossil"

Rephrased sentence:
"the Wollemi pine found in Australia is a surviving specimen of a conifer thought that it is long extinct and therefore known as a living fossil"



I am wondering if there is any difference between these sentences or bold parts? I am wondering how possible to rephrase the bold part at original.



Please feel free to ask question.

Many thanks
 
Last edited:
  • Glasguensis

    Signal Modulation
    English - Scotland
    There don't seem to be any bold parts, but yes, there is a difference. The dictionary example is grammatically correct, and your rephrasing unfortunately isn't. If I were to change your sentence into correct English I would change it back to the original - I don't seen any other simple modification which would work.
     

    Wordsmyth

    Senior Member
    Native language: English (BrE)
    The bold is visible on my screen, nima — and I agree with Glasguensis.

    Why do you want to rephrase the original sentence? Is it to help you understand the meaning?

    The last part of the sentence means "a conifer that people thought had been extinct for a long time, and which is therefore known as a living fossil". But the original wording is neater and more concise.

    Ws:)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top