In this article in the Daily Mail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2735926/Stone-Age-spears-lethal-BULLETS.html is the sentence:
They found the stone-tipped spears created larger 'wounds' than the wooden ones.
Can you omit ones here?
-
1In theory you could leave it out, but as 'stone' and 'wooden' are at opposite ends of the sentence, it is probably easier to understand if you include 'ones' here.– Kate BuntingOct 21, 2022 at 12:15
-
They found stone-tipped spears created larger 'wounds' than wooden ones. No need for the really.– LambieOct 21, 2022 at 17:58
-
@KateBunting Even if you include "ones", you need to remember what "ones" refers to. I don't understand what difference it makes whether to omit "ones" or not, in terms of understanding the sentence.– listenevaOct 22, 2022 at 2:04
-
@Lambie It's from this Daily Mail article: dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2735926/…– listenevaOct 22, 2022 at 2:06
-
In the example in your comment on the deleted answer, the white model and the black are directly contrasted. The Daily Mail sentence would sound awkward to me if it ended "...larger wounds than the wooden."– Kate BuntingOct 22, 2022 at 8:58
|
Show 2 more comments
1 Answer
It is simply not idiomatic. You either use "ones" to mean wooden spears or you specify what these other wooden things are.
They found the stone-tipped spears created larger 'wounds' than the wooden "ones"(spears).
or (supposing the other things under consideration are toothpicks)
They found the stone-tipped spears created larger 'wounds' than the wooden "toothpicks".
