The destruction was caused by X


Senior Member
In World War one, two cities were totally destroyed. The destruction was caused by X.
(X is the name of a country, ie, the country which attacked and destroyed these cities.)

Is the italicised part correct?
  • lingobingo

    Senior Member
    English - England
    It’s not how a native English-speaker would be likely to express it. Why do you want to use “caused by” a certain country? It totally fails to convey the disastrous nature of what happened, making it sound almost incidental.


    Senior Member
    English - England
    I mean incidental more in the sense of Lexico’s main definition of it:
    Happening as a minor accompaniment to something else.

    Two cities were totally destroyed. This was caused by [such-and-such a country].
    Writing it this way makes the event sound like a side issue, in my opinion. But there’s nothing wrong with it grammatically.
    Last edited:


    Senior Member
    English - U.S.
    It's vague and therefore doesn't sound natural, even if it is grammatical. For one thing, it doesn't need to be two sentences. As lingo suggests, it's not two separate ideas.

    In World War I*, two French cities were totally destroyed by the German army.

    * I = Roman numeral one
    < Previous | Next >