when we are talking about something, and we want to say that we will provide a history about that particular thing, for exp, we are talking about prison gangs in general, particularly about drug use in one particular gang.

the word History by itself, is misleading in my context.

can i say "a related history" (that is a history of drug use in that particular gang)

here is the sentence:

Prison gangs has become increasingly notorious for their illegal behavior. in this work we will, particularly, shed lights on the use of illicit drug use and trafficking in X gang. A related history ( a history o drug use in that gang) will consider ....


1 Answer 1


I think I'd say "a relevant history" or "the applicable history" or something of that sort in this context.

"Related" as the connotation of meaning, not the thing under discussion, but something else that is connected. Like you could say, "We will consider the history of drug use by this gang, and their related trafficking in illegal weapons." Buying or selling illegal weapons is not drug use, but we are saying that it was connected to the drug use in some way.

In this case, I think if you just said "a history of the gang" it would probably be clear from the context that this history will involve drug use.

BTW, "use of illicit drug use" is redundant. Just say "use of illicit drugs" or "illicit drug use".

You must log in to answer this question.

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