Timeline for Is there missing a "who" in " the only person everyone can agree was actually present that day is Luke"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2021 at 11:38 | comment | added | wtdark | oh, I read it wrong myself, sorry. | |
| Dec 28, 2021 at 3:30 | vote | accept | wtdark | ||
| Dec 27, 2021 at 19:32 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | I'd use that rather than who anyway (...the only person that everyone can agree was actually present that day is Luke) - and hopefully most learners would already know that "that" is always "optional" in such contexts. | |
| Dec 27, 2021 at 19:21 | comment | added | Colin Fine | This is because English often allows us to omit complementisers. Who everyone can agree [that they] were actually present on that day. Was is in the embedded that- clause (with omitted "that") introduced by agree. They can be omitted because who takes over its function, and who usually takes was unless there is a reason to expect it to be plural, whereas they takes were whether it is singular or plural. | |
| Dec 27, 2021 at 16:59 | comment | added | wtdark | wait, please I don't get it. "who everyone can agree was actually present that day.", there are 2 verbs in the clause? agree + was? | |
| Dec 27, 2021 at 16:49 | history | answered | Colin Fine | CC BY-SA 4.0 |