0

a. His leg was broken. His arm was bruised too.

b. His leg was broken. His arm was bruised as well.

c. His leg was broken. His arm was also bruised.

Are the above sentences grammatically correct and meaningful?

Generally, when I hear 'his arm was bruised too', I think that it has been said that something else was bruised. In these cases, nothing but the arm was bruised.

Many thanks

2

Yes, they are correct and meaningful. They all mean the same thing.

Generally, when I hear 'his arm was bruised too', I think that it has been said that something else was bruised. In these cases, nothing but the arm was bruised.

I don't believe "too" is ever quite as restrictive as you interpret.

In your examples, he had an injury (the broken leg) and another form of injury too (the bruised arm) so they are both forms of injury, even if different types of injury.

Making up an example.

Friend 1: He ordered all the most expensive desserts on the menu.

Friend 2: And he arrived in a stretched limousine too.

Even though one friend talks about a man buying food and the other about travelling in a car, which are quite different activities (except at drive through restaurants), both those statements are about "things that cost a lot of money" so it makes sense to use "too".

Another example:

I watched a movie with her--and I played on her X-box too.

Both are recreational activities, but they are not identical recreational activities, yet the sentence is failrly well-formed even with "too" in it (although it might be better to use both either "and" or "too", only one is needed, not both).

| improve this answer | |

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.