Tiwari, Rai appointed BJP’s Delhi and Bihar unit presidents
From: "Tiwari, Rai appointed BJP’s Delhi and Bihar unit presidents" - The Hindu

Here what I didn't understand is Tiwari,Rai appointed someone or Tiwari,Rai were appointed by someone. I am very confused in reading. Can anyone explains it clearly.


2 Answers 2


Your sentence sounds like a headline:

Tiwari, Rai appointed BJP’s Delhi and Bihar unit presidents

would usually be understood to mean Tiwari was appointed BJP's president in Delhi and Rai was appointed BJP's president in Bihar.

If both were responsible for selecting the presidents, it would read

Tiwari and Rai appoint BJP's Delhi and Bihar unit presidents


I at first read this as:

"Tiwari, Rai was the one responsible for appointing unit presidents for BJP's Delhi unit and Bihar unit".

However, you're quite correct that it could mean that

"Tiwari, Rai was appointed to be unit president of both BJP's Delhi unit and BJP's Bihar unit"

Where Tiwari, Rai is an individual; the construction would indicate that this person's first name was Rai and their last name was Tiwari.


"Tiwari and Rai were appointed to be presidents of BJPs Delhi unit and Bihar unit respectively

Where Tiwari and Rai are different people.

In this context, I would lean towards the last interpretation; it would be rather odd to break up a person's name into Last, First structure in the middle of a sentence, so it's more likely those are the names of two separate individuals.

Context would be needed to clarify what was meant here, unfortunately - the sentence itself is ambiguous.

  • 1
    I think the last interpretation is most likely; it fits typical headline-speak
    – eques
    Nov 30, 2016 at 18:07
  • That presidents is plural presents a problem with the interpretation that Tiwari was appointed president of both units. If that is the correct interpretation, there is a problem with the sentence (which could just be a mistake or typo).
    – ColleenV
    Nov 30, 2016 at 18:09
  • @ColleenV I agree, though one could argue that since they are two separate roles, it could be written as plural - especially given the overall ambiguity of the sentence!
    – Werrf
    Nov 30, 2016 at 18:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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