2 added 144 characters in body
source | link

Is the following sentence in bold grammatically correct?

Copp also found himself a center of controversy especially after a series of articles in 2004 by the Albuquerque Journal in New Mexico. Copp has claimed to have played a key role in rescue activities at Ground Zero in New York after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said are injuries from the event, mostly toxicity. The articles in the Albuquerque journal questioned both whether he played any important role at Ground Zero and whether he was eligible for any compensation for injury. In a four-part series about Copp, the Journal quoted several people who saw Copp at Ground Zero as saying that he showed up with a video camera and did no serious rescue work. The U.S. Justice Department fraud unit was investigating.

I can understand "He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said"

and apparently he was granted because he said "injuries from the event are mostly toxicity"..

But can we merge these two sentences into one sentence?

I cannot understand the structure.Where are relative clauses?

Could you please explain to me this structure if it is correct?

I would say :

He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said which/that injuries from the event are mostly toxicity.

Is the following sentence in bold grammatically correct?

Copp also found himself a center of controversy especially after a series of articles in 2004 by the Albuquerque Journal in New Mexico. Copp has claimed to have played a key role in rescue activities at Ground Zero in New York after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said are injuries from the event, mostly toxicity. The articles in the Albuquerque journal questioned both whether he played any important role at Ground Zero and whether he was eligible for any compensation for injury. In a four-part series about Copp, the Journal quoted several people who saw Copp at Ground Zero as saying that he showed up with a video camera and did no serious rescue work. The U.S. Justice Department fraud unit was investigating.

I can understand "He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said"

and apparently he was granted because he said "injuries from the event are mostly toxicity"..

But can we merge these two sentences into one sentence?

I cannot understand the structure.Where are relative clauses?

Could you please explain to me this structure if it is correct?

Is the following sentence in bold grammatically correct?

Copp also found himself a center of controversy especially after a series of articles in 2004 by the Albuquerque Journal in New Mexico. Copp has claimed to have played a key role in rescue activities at Ground Zero in New York after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said are injuries from the event, mostly toxicity. The articles in the Albuquerque journal questioned both whether he played any important role at Ground Zero and whether he was eligible for any compensation for injury. In a four-part series about Copp, the Journal quoted several people who saw Copp at Ground Zero as saying that he showed up with a video camera and did no serious rescue work. The U.S. Justice Department fraud unit was investigating.

I can understand "He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said"

and apparently he was granted because he said "injuries from the event are mostly toxicity"..

But can we merge these two sentences into one sentence?

I cannot understand the structure.Where are relative clauses?

Could you please explain to me this structure if it is correct?

I would say :

He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said which/that injuries from the event are mostly toxicity.

1
source | link

He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said are injuries from the event, mostly toxicity

Is the following sentence in bold grammatically correct?

Copp also found himself a center of controversy especially after a series of articles in 2004 by the Albuquerque Journal in New Mexico. Copp has claimed to have played a key role in rescue activities at Ground Zero in New York after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said are injuries from the event, mostly toxicity. The articles in the Albuquerque journal questioned both whether he played any important role at Ground Zero and whether he was eligible for any compensation for injury. In a four-part series about Copp, the Journal quoted several people who saw Copp at Ground Zero as saying that he showed up with a video camera and did no serious rescue work. The U.S. Justice Department fraud unit was investigating.

I can understand "He was granted more than $600,000 in compensation for what he said"

and apparently he was granted because he said "injuries from the event are mostly toxicity"..

But can we merge these two sentences into one sentence?

I cannot understand the structure.Where are relative clauses?

Could you please explain to me this structure if it is correct?