He was showing to me pictures of other members of his orchestra on the invitation brochure to their concert that would take place on Sunday.

The meaning that is meant to be expressed here is that those pictures of other members are, in fact, a part of the brochure. However, the sentence can also be taken as if those were separate pictures that lay on the brochure.

What would be the best way to avoid that ambiguity?

  • @FumbleFingers - Thanks for this valuable input. Every time I read your replies, I learn something new. – brilliant Jun 16 '19 at 12:48
  • Except, more often than not, those "replies" should be answers, not comments. – J.R. Jun 16 '19 at 20:29

To avoid the ambiguity you could express it in one of two different ways.

He was showing me additional pictures of those members of his orchestra who had appeared in the invitation brochure.

This sentence indicates that the pictures exist separately from the brochure itself.

He was showing me all of the pictures of the members of his orchestra that appeared inside the invitation brochure.

In this version, it's made clear that it's the pictures exist only inside the brochure.

Note that I changed on to in, assuming that if you opened up the brochure it would contain more pictures of the people. Idiomatically, in the brochure would also be understood to mean on the front and back covers. If the pictures only did appear on the front cover (perhaps as some kind of montage), then on could be retained—and my second sentence rewritten to accommodate that fact.

| improve this answer | |

Change the preposition to 'in', unless the pictures are on the cover or the brochure is not a folded type.

| improve this answer | |
  • I think you could use "in" even if the pictures were on the cover of the brochure. – J.R. Jun 16 '19 at 20:30

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.