3

"Association with real life events helps the author maintain the suspension of disbelief without which, a science fiction story becomes unrealistic."

I feel like "which" refers to "suspension of disbelief", but some people say it's "association with real-life events". Which interpretation is correct?

7
  • 3
    It's "suspension of disbelief".
    – BillJ
    Commented Jun 11, 2017 at 18:48
  • 4
    Looks like the comma is misplaced as well. I'd move it to a position right after disbelief.
    – Robusto
    Commented Jun 11, 2017 at 18:55
  • 1
    @Robusto i thought so too, but this is how it was written, and i tried to show you guys exactly what was there, in case it made a difference meaning-wise Commented Jun 11, 2017 at 19:30
  • Is this a transcription of someone speaking? I only ask because I can definitely hear someone saying that sentence and pausing on the which. Commented Jun 12, 2017 at 3:35
  • @Cantalouping i'm not sure whether it is, but it was a partof a reading text in my english test.... For some reason though, the model answer is "association with real life events"...weird.... Commented Jun 12, 2017 at 3:47

1 Answer 1

1

In your example

Association with real life events helps the author maintain the suspension of disbelief without which, a science fiction story becomes unrealistic.

which refers to the

suspension of disbelief

rephrased

without the suspension of disbelief, a science fiction story becomes unrealistic.

4
  • 1
    I don't find the second sentence very helpful (because it reads so ungrammatically in itself); maybe there's some other way to show the relationships? Commented Jun 16, 2017 at 0:10
  • Sorry, i feel like the second sentence is incorrect too, as for the comma, it is in the wrong place Commented Jun 16, 2017 at 0:13
  • 1
    I've got to disagree on this one. Association with real life events helps maintain the suspension of disbelief. But it is the suspension of disbelief that is required to avoid the story becoming unrealistic. "Without which" refers to the immediately preceding thing.
    – fixer1234
    Commented Jun 16, 2017 at 0:38
  • @fixer1234 Yes, that is well explained Commented Jun 16, 2017 at 1:58

You must log in to answer this question.

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