Mass gatherings probably increase risks of COVID-19 transmission, so we should reduce gatherings as much as possible.

To convey the idea, I make up the following sentence

We should reduce gatherings for COVID-19.

Is it natural to say it that way?

  • The first sentence is clearer and much less ambiguous. Why does it need to be changed? In your "reduce gatherings" it means to have fewer meetings, in theory it would allow one or two gathering of thirty people or more. That is not what the original sentence says. I'm sorry, but is the question mark at "we should reduce....? deliberate or a mistake?
    – Mari-Lou A
    Jun 25, 2020 at 8:08
  • @Mari-LouA Sorry for misleading, I updated it.
    – RobertH
    Jun 25, 2020 at 9:17
  • @Mari-LouA Thank you. "Why does it need to be changed?" I'd just like to know whether the original one could be shortened.
    – RobertH
    Jun 25, 2020 at 9:20

1 Answer 1


"Mass gatherings" refers to multiple events, where each event is attended by large numbers - "masses" - of people. If you just want to have smaller gatherings, you would prefer

We should reduce the size of gatherings, for COVID-19

note the use of a comma - it helps make it clear that the gathering isn't "for" COVID-19, as silly as that may sound. Probably not necessary. Maybe if you're speaking to Trump fans.

As Mari-Lou is commenting, you could look at "have fewer gatherings" also - or, if you want both,

We should have fewer, and smaller, gatherings, due to COVID-19.


We should reduce the number of gatherings we are having, and keep them small, because of the risk of COVID-19.

Countless variations will work.

You must log in to answer this question.

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