0

When I translated some of "get embroiled" sentences I got active form of sentence. It may be a kind of translate mistake. I couldn't understand before going to translate as well.

Example sentence:

Our goal is getting embroiled in a discussion about past events.

What would this example sentence mean if I had changed the "get embroiled in" to "embroiling in" without get?

"Got broken" or "was broken" is easy to understand. These might be done by someone. I can understand. But as for "get embroiled" or "get involved" I can not. Who could have done these?

1
  • 1
    It might help answer your question if you post actual example sentences from English sources. Jan 15 at 7:47
2

The meaning of "embroil (someone)" is "to involve (someone) (in an argument)". It's pretty rare as an active verb, and most common in the "get passive".

I got embroiled in a discussion about climate change.

As "embroil" is a transitive verb, if you do use it in the active voice, you need to supply a subject and object.

My friends embroiled me in a discussion about climate change.

Our goal is someone embroiling us in a debate about past events.

That's not very natural.

It may be in your target language, "get embroiled" is translated to an active intransitive verb. It's not unusual for different languages to express things differently.

The sense of "get embroiled" is normally undesirable- it has the sense of being trapped in a pointless argument. It sounds odd to talk about a goal of "getting embroiled".

2
  • Okay thanks. My friends got me embroiled in a discussion about climate change. is this sentence wrong?
    – user123960
    Jan 15 at 9:16
  • 1
    That's fine....
    – James K
    Jan 15 at 9:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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