0

When I use there is/ are Noun, I’ll use a relative clause to expand the sentence. For example

There were a lot of students who didn’t take part in the activity.

But I came across some sentences written like this

There were a lot of students didn’t take part in the activity.

I just thought it was a typing error until I saw this example on Oxford Dictionary

Government claims that there is no poverty are belied by the number of homeless people on the streets.

I’m really confused with this sentence. I don’t know why they don’t use a relative clause after poverty. But even if it’s correct without a relative clause in this structure, why is it are belied instead of is because poverty is uncountable?

1
  • There were a lot of students not taking part in the activity. Or maybe taking no part. Commented Oct 7, 2020 at 5:44

1 Answer 1

0

In the last sentence, the subject of "are belied" is the word "claims". Since it is plural, "are" is correct, and there is a relative clause, shown in brackets here:

Government claims [that there is no poverty] are belied by the number of homeless people on the streets.

It means the government claims are shown to be false. The claims are those that say that there is no poverty.

Your second example sentence is not grammatical. The relative clause needs a relative pronoun (who) or subordinator (that), as in your first sentence:

There were a lot of students who / that didn’t take part in the activity.

The pronoun or subordinator might be omitted in careless speech, but it shouldn't be omitted in writing.

You must log in to answer this question.

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