Thread: My questions about English

Originally Posted by oldboy

This is out of BBC new Bangladesh water may still be unsafe:

Ministers say that more research is needed on this and that people should not be alarmed.

Does 'more research is needed on this' mean 'it's necessary to research this (=the problem above)' or anything else?

Yes. It means it's necessary to research this (more).

Originally Posted by oldboy

The water that these wells tapped was contaminated with arsenic, and millions were affected in what the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history'.

affected = influence, touch
in = by
That is '...millions were affected in what...' = 'millions were influenced/touched by what'?
I can't understand sense of that part of the sentences.

The "what" (noun) you are looking for is "poisoning." The basic idea is:

...millions were affected by the poisoning.

(You are correct about the meaning. It means millions were influenced/touched by the poisoning. Even simpler: millions were poisoned.)

The rest of the sentence describes the poisoning. You can think about it like a который clause:

...millions were affected in the poisoning, which the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history'.

(This means: The poisoning was so bad that the World Health Organization termed it (called it) "the greatest mass poisoning in history.")

So the original part ...in what the World Health Organisation termed... is just a way to tell us more about the "what" (noun = poisoning).

Does that help?

Originally Posted by Lynn

Does that help?

And how! Thank you, Lynn.

And is "in what" used only in passive constructions or it's possible to use it in active too?
For example, In letter I often use in what everybody calls 'smilies'.

Originally Posted by oldboy

Originally Posted by Lynn

Does that help?

And how! Thank you, Lynn.

And is "in what" used only in passive constructions or it's possible to use it in active too?
For example, In letter I often use in what everybody calls 'smilies'.

Both passive and active are okay, but it's good that you asked. It made me realize that there's something I should have explained better. The construction is not "in what," it's just "what." The "in" was used because it is connected to the passive construction using "poisoning." ("in the poisoning")

So your active example should be:

In letters I often use what everybody calls 'smilies.'

So sometimes you don't need a preposition: She wrote what eventually became a famous novel. (She wrote a novel = no preposition.)

And sometimes you do need a preposition. I was bitten by what turned out to be a poisonous spider. (I was bitten by a spider = preposition.)

Again this reminds me of который. Sometimes you don't need a preposition and sometimes you do, depending on the sentence:
Мы говорили о студентах, которым мы помогали прошлым летом.
Мы говорили о его сестре, с которой мы познакомились в среду.

I'll start one after another...

Lynn,
As far as I understood in the sentence '...and millions were affected in what the World...' the preposition in connects with millions. Am I right?

Originally Posted by oldboy

I'll start one after another...

Lynn,
As far as I understood in the sentence '...and millions were affected in what the World...' the preposition in connects with millions. Am I right?

Hm, I might not entirely understand your question, but in my mind there is no connection between "millions" and "in." (Remember, "in" = "by" here.) The "in" ("by") is attached to the explanation of what affected the millions (of people). To demonstrate this, imagine the sentence were shorter:

...and millions were affected. (But we don't know what affected the million.)

You would NOT say ...and millions were affected in. You would be left wondering "in what?"

There is no need for "in" until you introduce what was affecting the millions:

...and millions were affected in the poisoning.

I hope this makes sense. I wish I could think of a better explanation. Maybe someone else can add to this.

Lynn, ))) OK, then
...and millions were affected in the poisoning = ...and millions were affected by the poisoning?

Originally Posted by oldboy

...and millions were affected in the poisoning = ...and millions were affected by the poisoning?

Yup! Personally I would say "by," but the meaning of the sentence is the same.

Originally Posted by Lynn

Yup! Personally I would say "by," but the meaning of the sentence is the same.

And then it's possible to say 'and millions were affected by what the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history'. Yes?

Originally Posted by oldboy

And then it's possible to say 'and millions were affected by what the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history'. Yes?

Correct!

Originally Posted by Lynn

Originally Posted by oldboy

And then it's possible to say 'and millions were affected by what the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history'. Yes?

Correct!

hurray!!! I see, at last!
Many thanks, Lynn.

The preposition in was confused me, because in our textbooks passive structure is only considered together the preposition by or with' that is come by agent.
For instance,
I wrote the letter - active structure
The letter was written by me - passive one
And there agent (what the World Health Organisation termed 'the greatest mass poisoning in history) was introduced by the preposition in. It turn out that agent can be introduced by the preposition in.

Originally Posted by oldboy

The preposition in was confused me, because in our textbooks passive structure is only considered together the preposition by or with' that is come by agent.

I completely understand your confusion. It is strange now that I think about it. You can only substitute "in" for "by" in certain situations like this one (particularly events: Ten were killed in the terrorist attack). But for now, I think it's just important that you can recognize and understand this use of "in," but not necessary for you to use it.

And now for one last correction.

Originally Posted by oldboy

The preposition in was confusing me, because in our textbooks passive structure is only considered together with the preposition by or with' that is come by agent.

I'm not sure what you meant by "that is come by agent," but I think you might mean "that is decided by the agent." Or "that is connected with the agent." Maybe?

Originally Posted by Lynn

I'm not sure what you meant by "that is come by agent," but I think you might mean "that is decided by the agent." Or "that is connected with the agent." Maybe?

The letter was written by me.
The letter was written with a pen.
The letter - is a patient; me and a pen - are agents
Under '...together with the preposition by or with that is come by the agent.' I meant that the agent (me or a pen) follows the preposition 'by' or 'with'.
i.e. '...together with the preposition by or with that is come by the agent.' had to look like '...together with the preposition by or with that is followed by the agent (me or a pen).'
It's probably I used the incorrect verb come... it was necessary follow.

Originally Posted by oldboy

'...together with the preposition by or with that is followed by the agent (me or a pen).'
It's probably I used the incorrect verb come... it was necessary follow.

Makes sense now!

Lynn,
and can the only the preposition in be used in the meaning (instead of) the one by?
(is it possible only the preposition in to use instead of the one by?)

Originally Posted by oldboy

Lynn,
and can the only the preposition in be used in the meaning (instead of) the one by?
(is it possible only the preposition in to use instead of the one by?)

I think you are asking: are there any other prepositions that can be used to mean "by" in this situation? Right?

The simple answer: no.

The more complicated answer: I can think of one preposition that is similar to "by" but not 100% the same in meaning: during. Millions were affected during the storm. However, there is a small difference in meaning. By the storm implies that the people might still be affected after the storm (for example, their houses fell down). During the storm only means that they were affected while the storm was happening (for example, the electricity temporarily stopped working).

But from the more common prepositions, no, I can't think of any other that could replace "by" in that situation.

...It was so far that I thought that the preposition 'by' in '...and millions were affected in what the World...' designated the agent!
So is the preposition 'in' in '...and millions were affected in what the World...' the preposition of the time? That is 'in' = во время/в течении?!

Originally Posted by oldboy

...It was so far that I thought that the preposition 'by' in '...and millions were affected in what the World...' designated the agent!
So is the preposition 'in' in '...and millions were affected in what the World...' the preposition of the time? That is 'in' = во время/в течении?!

Have no fear! Your understanding was correct. By = In = designating the agent. During = во время.


Sorry, I shouldn't have made it more complicated. I only meant that "during" is the only other preposition that can be used there and still mean approximately the same thing.

Unless someone else wants to offer an opinion or better explanation? Explaining repositions is hard!

Originally Posted by Lynn

Have no fear! Your understanding was correct. By = In = designating the agent. During = во время.

Well, thanks God! because I was going round the twist...

Originally Posted by Lynn

Explaining repositions is hard!

But you are good at this!

Jack paid Mary a million dollars to appear in the film.

Will who be appeared in the film: Jack or Mary?