reduced relative clause

Discussion in 'English Only' started by chiyaan vikram, Jul 29, 2016.

  1. chiyaan vikram

    chiyaan vikram Senior Member

    india- hindi
    It is the result of repeated political opportunism and ineptitude , which has followed up on a series of mistakes and promises not kept..

    Can we say using reduced restrictive clause

    It is the result of repeated political opportunism and ineptitude , which has followed up on a series of mistakes and promises which are not kept
     
  2. Cagey post mod (English Only / Latin)

    California
    English - US
    Where did you see this, chiyaan vikra?
     
  3. chiyaan vikram

    chiyaan vikram Senior Member

    india- hindi
    < ---- >

    I read that article in economic times of India..


    < ---- > Off-topic question. Cagey.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 30, 2016
  4. Cagey post mod (English Only / Latin)

    California
    English - US
    Yes, this is close, but kept is the past tense, so you should use 'were': "which has followed up on a series of mistakes and promises which were not kept."
     
  5. kimyoungmi New Member

    English - U.S.
    Cagey is right with past-tense "were". If the result "has followed up on" that stuff, the "following up" is already in the past, so the stuff followed-up on (the unkept promises) are even more in the past.

    But then, if this were not a specific result (of things in the past) but were a GENERAL observation of a process that regularly happens, you could put it all in simple present tense:
    "It is the result of repeated political opportunism and ineptitude, which follow(s) up on a series of mistakes and promises which are not kept." (You could also still choose past "were" here, if those promises were unkept before the process begins.)

    "Kept" is a past participle, but passives using p.p. can be any tense. So its inherent past form alone is not the reason for the past tense, "were". In the original sentence, "promises not kept" is not clear for tense; the only sign of the need for past tense in the relative clause is the present-perfect form, "has followed". (You of course can make a theoretical sentence using both "has followed up" and "are not kept" (promises that are never kept, not supposed to be kept), but that's not the situation being described here.)
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2016

Share This Page

Loading...