Shipwrecks are more likely to be found

[aditya8062]

Good Day Ron
i am not able to understand the following text that you have written in this thread regarding "including"

when you use the word 'including', you have to use it was singular/plural according to the quantities of whatever it refers to. in this case, there is clearly more than one archaeologist / treasure hunter / sport diver, so you'd have to say '...including archaeologists, treasure hunters, and sport divers'.

i have read somewhere in your post that "including" after comma typically acts like a preposition and hence modifies the noun before the comma .now in this question in option C isn't "including" modifying "anyone" . if it is doing so then should we not use singular sense of "archaeologist, treasure hunter, or sport diver" as "anyone" is singular

honestly i had ruled out option C for other solid reasons .but plz correct me if my understanding of "including" is correct

i have also read in your post that "including" is always used to provide a partial list of examples .can this be used to rule out the wrong usage of "including" here as the list detailed in option C with "including" seems exhaustive and not partial

[RonPurewal]

Actually, it's worse than that: "Anyone" is singular, and so refers to only one person at a time. Therefore, it's complete nonsense to state that "anyone" can "include" multiple people.

[harika.apu]

I think there was a typo in his post there - he meant that, if you use the word "including" here (as choice C does), then you are talking about the class of <whatevers>, so that should be plural.

That's not what the sentence is trying to say, though - the sentence refers to "anyone in scuba gear," so what we say after that should apply to that single person. That one person isn't going to "include" archaelogist, treasure hunter, or sport diver. Rather, that one person could be an archaelogist, or a treasure hunter, or a sport diver.

A and B use a different setup: whether instead of including. Can't use A, though, because it says "anyONE... whether THEY be..." and that's a pronoun error. But B says "anyone, whether A, B, or C." Because "anyone" is singular, that person can only be one thing - you're essentially saying: this one person could be an archaelogist, or a treasure hunter, or a diver.

Hello Stacey,
I have a doubt here.
I learnt that any one means - any one of a group.
anyone means everyone .but both are singular
I don't understand when it means everyone why to specify again few of them by saying including archaeologist,treasure hunter,diver.
Could you please tell if my interpretation is correct.

Thanks:)

[RonPurewal]

I don't understand when it means everyone why to specify again few of them by saying including archaeologist,treasure hunter,diver.

...because the writer might want to give a few examples, just to add color/meaning/effect/detail to the sentence.

analogy:
say i'm looking to buy exercise equipment for a hotel.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone.
BORING.
these sentences do not make me want to buy the equipment that is advertised.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone, including teenagers, seniors, and people with disabilities.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone, whether an athlete or a total beginner.
ok, now THESE sentences make me actually want to buy this equipment!

[harika.apu]

I don't understand when it means everyone why to specify again few of them by saying including archaeologist,treasure hunter,diver.

...because the writer might want to give a few examples, just to add color/meaning/effect/detail to the sentence.

analogy:
say i'm looking to buy exercise equipment for a hotel.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone.
BORING.
these sentences do not make me want to buy the equipment that is advertised.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone, including teenagers, seniors, and people with disabilities.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone, whether an athlete or a total beginner.
ok, now THESE sentences make me actually want to buy this equipment!

Hello Ron ,
Thanks for your reply.

[tim]

[RonPurewal]

you're welcome.

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron,
A)Shipwrecks are more likely to be found undisturbed at great depths than in shallow coastal waters, which exposes archaeological remains to turbulence and makes them accessible to anyone in scuba gear, whether they be archaeologist, treasure hunter, or sport diver

second they refers to remains by default. also problem?

[RonPurewal]

"they" (plural) CAN'T refer to "anyone (singular) in scuba gear".
that pronoun is clearly intended to refer to people in scuba gear, so, the sentence is wrong... and your thought process about "they" should stop right there.

why would you waste your time wondering "Which WRONG noun could this pronoun refer to?"

[Crisc419]

Experts,

What's the difference between:
"The shipwrecks are more likely to be found in Australia than in Europe"

AND

"The shipwrecks are found more likely in Australia than in Europe"?

I am just curious.

Thanks

well, the short version is that the first one is right and the second one is wrong.

in general, when you use "likely" to modify verbs --
* "likely" can be placed after is/are/was/were/etc.
* it can also be placed after other helping verbs (can, well, would, could, and so on)

however...
* i don't think you can ever place "likely" after a verb that isn't one of the verb types mentioned above. in particular, i can't think of any examples in which "likely" can follow an action verb, as in your second sentence above.

so, for instance, the following two sentences are correct:
spencer is likely to fail his driving test tomorrow.
spencer will likely fail his driving test tomorrow.

... but you can't put "likely" after "fail".

hey， Ron,

we cannot place "likely" after a verb, is that because "likely" is used to describe the possibility of one action , the verb is used to describe "a fact" that the action will happen or happened.
so if "likely" is placed after the verb, there will be a logical contradiction between" possiblity "and " fact" . is my reasoning right?

thanks.

[Crisc419]

I don't understand when it means everyone why to specify again few of them by saying including archaeologist,treasure hunter,diver.

...because the writer might want to give a few examples, just to add color/meaning/effect/detail to the sentence.

analogy:
say i'm looking to buy exercise equipment for a hotel.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone.
BORING.
these sentences do not make me want to buy the equipment that is advertised.

This exercise equipment can be used by everyone, including teenagers, seniors, and people with disabilities.
This exercise equipment can be used by anyone, whether an athlete or a total beginner.
ok, now THESE sentences make me actually want to buy this equipment!

"including" is in V-ING form, so does it have a problem that it is modifying the subject of the sentence-- shipwrecks? or" including" is an exception?

[staceyp29]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your response.

You mentioned that C has other issues - "the bad usage of 'including' with the list of singular nouns".

I didn't quite get your point. If you don't mind, could you elaborate on the usage of "including" with the list of singular nouns.

Is it valid to use "whether" to refer to a list of items such as "whether X, Y or Z"?

Thanks in advance

when you use the word 'including', you have to use it was singular/plural according to the quantities of whatever it refers to. in this case, there is clearly more than one archaeologist / treasure hunter / sport diver, so you'd have to say '...including archaeologists, treasure hunters, and sport divers'.

as for your last question, yes, that construction involving 'whether' is valid.

Hi, thanks for elaborating on the incorrect usage of the word "including" in option C.
However, I'm a bit confused to "anyone" in scuba gear is a plural.
Can you please explain?
Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

"anyone" is singular. (We'll let you know if anyone finds your bag and gives it to us.)

this isn't tricky -- it even ends with "one"!

[jabgt]

Dear Experts,

Regarding choice A, besides its all mentioned grammatical errors, may I say the meaning sounds incorrect by its way of wording? I mean, can waters , with its normal state, actively expose something or can waters actively make something accessible to somebody? I feel like only if certain event, such as extreme bad weather, happens to waters, then waters might expose something or make something accesible, since "expose" and "make" are action verbs not state verbs. ( Since English is foreign language to me, if I may, I'd like to form and adjust my ears based on what experts have confirmed. )

Thanks a lot!

[RonPurewal]

it's possible to say that shallow waters "expose something to turbulence" whereas deeper waters do not.