2

Here my ideas:

  1. The geometric reconstruction of object models is carried out in a way to propagate errors from inner to outer bounds.

  2. outer bounds are enforced with orientation and placement regularities.

When I join them, if I write it as

The geometric reconstruction of object models is carried out in a way to propagate errors from inner to outer bounds which are enforced with orientation and placement regularities.

I hope this is correct.

My question is, can I omit "which are" and continue like, "... bounds enforced..."?

4
  • No! Don't use "which are" to join these two sentences! There's no reason not to leave them as separate sentences anyway, and if you try to join them like that it will likely be misinterpreted as meaning statement #1 applies only to those particular outer boundaries that happen to be thus enforced. Unless you've got a good reason to stitch two sentences together, don't. There is no good reason in this case. Oct 2, 2013 at 0:29
  • @FumbleFingers:ok in that sense, can i use "and" to join them as i am running out of word count.. so want to breif anyhow.
    – gnp
    Oct 2, 2013 at 21:44
  • I must be honest - I don't understand what your text actually means. Grammatically speaking, ...is carried out in a way to propagate errors... should actually be ...is carried out in such a way as to propagate errors... But I'm not sure there's any reason to mention that anyway, so I don't see why you can't just replace that entire text with propagates errors. That should reduce your word count enough. I see no point in saying X is carried out in such a way as to do Y, when you can just as easily say X does Y, especially if wordcount is an issue. Oct 3, 2013 at 11:52
  • Maybe use "the latter": "...inner and outer bounds, the latter enforced with orientation and placement regularities."
    – lurker
    Jan 2, 2016 at 18:10

1 Answer 1

1

Grammatically, “which are” can be left out in the combination sentence. But as a practical matter, whether to use “which are” or leave it out is not the problem. Both of the original sentences are clumsy and unclear, and the combination still more so. Consider rewriting in a form like

Errors propagate from inner to outer bounds when objects are reconstructed. Objects are orientated and placed to comply with outer bounds.

(The rewritten example might not have the meaning you intended, because I don't understand what the originals mean.)

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .