The recommended prevention strategy — making sure that no child goes to bed without eating a meal — adopted from 2015 ensured a sharp drop in the number of children falling sick.


Why have they used adopted from to me it doesn't sound idiomatic and I think in its place adopted in should be used because the event happened in 2015 not from 2015.

Am I correct?

| improve this question | | | | |
  • To my mostly-British ears adopted in 2015 sounds better too. Adopted from 2015 to 2016 makes sense with from is indicating the start of a period. – jonathanjo Jun 18 '19 at 18:30
  • Adopted from 2015 could also mean there was a previous similar strategy in 2015 and they are using all or part of it in a later plan. – Peter Jennings Jun 18 '19 at 19:38

You are right that the more idiomatic use is "adopted in"

the strategy was adopted in 2015.

However, as jonathanjo points out, the writer may have used "adopted from" to imply that the strategy has been continually active since the date it was adopted.

Although I would not use it myself, I don't have a problem with it. It's not particularly elegant, as an "adoption" is a singular event in time, not an ongoing process, but nevertheless it makes sense as shorthand.

Still, if it doesn't sound right to you, don't use it. There are more idiomatic ways to say the same thing.

the strategy has been active since its adoption in 2015

| improve this answer | | | | |

Your Answer

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