2

The meeting was not an obligation, but a courtesy extended by both parties.

Is this sentence correct? I think "was extended.." in place of "extended" will fit.

2
  • 1
    You could insert "that was" to maintain the sense of the original (the meeting was the courtesy), but inserting "was" alone conveys something completely different (the courtesy can now refer to something other than the meeting).
    – Lawrence
    Mar 30 at 9:35
  • I've edited your question's title to make it more descriptive. Please feel free to roll back the edit or change it further if it isn't suitable.
    – Lawrence
    Mar 30 at 9:47

2 Answers 2

1

This is an example of a form of ellipsis called whiz-deletion, where a relative pronoun and a be-verb are omitted from a sentence. The sentence without ellipsis would be:

The meeting was not an obligation, but a courtesy [that was] extended by both parties

0

There extended is the past participle used adjectivally as a postmodifier of courtesy and so no verb is needed. The structure is : not an X but a Y.

It was not a command but merely a suggestion offered.

The passport was not authentic but someone else's passport altered.

If you want to use a verb such that you'd have two clauses, it would be better to use the past perfect if describing the events that had led to the meeting:

The meeting was not an obligation but a courtesy had been extended.

But if you are describing the events as they were unfolding, then you could use was:

The meeting was not an obligation but a courtesy was extended.

You must log in to answer this question.