0

Can we omit the subject and object at the same time?

example:

  1. Although he is hurt by her, he still loves her. (nothing omitted)

  2. Although hurt by her, he still loves her. (subject omitted only)

  3. Although he is hurt, he still loves her. (object omitted only)

  4. Although hurt, he still loves her. (subject and object omitted )

I was taught about dropping the subject, but never know something about dropping the object, so I wonder which we should omit in priority, or if we should omit them at the same time, when the main clause and the dependent clause have the same subject and object.

Improve this question
5
  • You asked the same question here link Are you dissatisfied with the answers you got?
    – BillJ
    Apr 21 at 7:47
  • Yes, I want more answers, and the answer of @Flater satisfy me. But I still want to know which is the best style.
    – leaningEnglish
    Apr 21 at 9:14
  • 1
    I’m voting to close this question because this question has been answered on another site (see comment) and the request for further answers is also given there. Briefly, it depends on context.
    – Peter Jennings
    Apr 21 at 12:59
  • I‘m waiting for further answers from @Flater below, hoping this question not to be closed
    – leaningEnglish
    Apr 21 at 13:50
  • Is there some reason why you did not mention the fact that 2 and 4 also omit the verb "is"? And the fact that 3 and 4 also omit the preposition "by"?
    – MarcInManhattan
    May 31 at 2:00

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
0

The title of your question doesn't really match the content. All of your examples contain a subject and an object, even the final iteration:

Although hurt, he still loves her.

What you're really asking is if your sentence means the same after you've edited it down considerably, and the answer is no. It still means the subject 'he' is hurt, but your second two iterations don't explicitly state who hurt him. He could have been hurt by someone else other than 'her'.

Improve this answer
3
  • Contextually that sentence only makes sense if "she" was involved with the hurt. "Still" implies that it would've been reasonable for the love to have ended (due to the hurt, hence implicating her to be related to it in some way that the love for her could have ended). Grammatically, it doesn't state who caused the hurt, but the context makes it the most reasonable interpretation. In the same vein, I could say "Even though I am terrified of spiders, I still go into the shed when I need to". Grammatically, I never said that there are spiders in the shed, but that is clearly what I'm implying.
    – Flater
    Apr 21 at 6:25
  • Thanks for all your reply. Based on the interpretation of @Flater , should the original sentence be written as sentence2, 3 or 4? Which is the best style?
    – leaningEnglish
    Apr 21 at 9:08
  • It's reasonable that if someone was hurt in the past by someone else he may or may not be capable of love, so I don't think it necessarily relates to being hurt by the specified repson.
    – Stuart F
    Apr 21 at 9:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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