Timeline for What is the subject of the “sizzled”?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 7 at 1:17 | comment | added | RIN | Thank you for answering my question and commenting a lot. Because many answered and commented, it is diffIcult for me to reply all of them, I read and learn a lot from all comments. I now understand what I couldn’t know but for you. I admire you all with special reverence. | |
| Jan 6 at 0:49 | answer | added | James K | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 5 at 10:32 | comment | added | Stuart F | I'm not sure that it's 100% an error but it's certainly non-standard. The noun following a preposition can sometimes be omitted in casual speech (and in some dialects people will form what might be non-standard phrasal verbs that way e.g. "Can you come into?" meaning "Can you come inside/into the building?"), but this text appears to be more formal. | |
| Jan 5 at 9:02 | comment | added | Michael Harvey | Beware that 'textbook'. | |
| Jan 5 at 8:35 | comment | added | BillJ | I agree with the last comment. It makes no sense. The preposition should be "in", not "into". The subject of "sizzled" would then be "something". Another possibility is that the word "it" is missing: "... throwing something into it that sizzled for a split second". This version would also have "something" as subject of "sizzled". | |
| Jan 5 at 8:13 | history | edited | Mari-Lou A | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted the three oversize images of text, the OP's transcription is accurate but in case someone doubts it, the snippet is proof.
|
| Jan 5 at 7:59 | answer | added | swmcdonnell | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jan 5 at 3:16 | history | edited | RIN | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Jan 5 at 2:00 | comment | added | Peter | There is an error in the sentence. A possible correction is: " ... throwing something into it that sizzled ... ". | |
| Jan 5 at 1:50 | history | asked | RIN | CC BY-SA 4.0 |