0

Reading the paragraph,

We have been running this company successfully from the past twenty years and after having 5 branches we are going ahead and opening a new branch. This would not have been possible today because of the efforts and dedication of our management and employees. So we invite each and every employee to attend this programme as they too are a vital part of this company.

I was thinking if it is better to use "without" instead of "because of". Would you choice to use "without" also? Why or Why not.

1

Yes, you should absolutely use "without" instead of "because."

Additionally, you should use "for the past 20 years" instead of "from." Actually, there are several errors here. I'll try and clean it up without changing it too much.

We have been running this company successfully for the past twenty years. Having previously established 5 branches, we are going to go ahead and open a new branch. This would not have been possible today without the efforts and dedication of our management and employees. So we invite each and every employee to attend this program as they too are a vital part of this company.

There are still several awkward phrases here, but I'm assuming you don't want a wholesale change of the text.

0

OP, to answer your original question as to why this should be amended:

This would not have been possible today because of the efforts...

This almost implies that the improvements were hindered by the employees as because implies a cause and result. In the sentence you have above, the only available cause is are the employees, and the only available result is "not being possible", although it would be a very awkward way to say it.

Using "without" avoids this blame.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.