A 60-year-old motorcyclist was left / after an accident with a lorry in Tampines on Saturday afternoon (July 3).
Is “left” redundant?
Thanks!
A 60-year-old motorcyclist was left / after an accident with a lorry in Tampines on Saturday afternoon (July 3).
Is “left” redundant?
Thanks!
I don’t think ‘left’ is redundant but I can understand that sentence. A 60 year old motorcyclist was left what? injured, dead etc?
Please review your sentence. Hardly can I make out what you mean!
And you are a spammer who has been silenced.
Left is not redundant. It’s the only verb.
The motorcyclist was left with a lorry.
The motorcyclist remained behind with a lorry after the accident.
I would prefer “with the lorry” immediately following the verb.
A 60 year old motorcyclist was left with a lorry after an accident on Saturday.
An alternate interpretation of the original sentence might be:
The man owned a motorcycle and a lorry. He wrecked his motorcycle. So now he only has the lorry.
It should be “left unconscious”. Sorry for the error and the late response.
This gives slightly more information, but it makes no difference in the grammar. “Left” is still the only verb.
I think what is confusing people is why he was left with a lorry. If he was unconscious, why was he left at all, instead of going to a hospital?
I should also note that the word lorry is not used at all in American English. I thought it was some sort of vehicle, but I had to look it up to find out for sure. If an ambulance is considered a lorry, then the sentence would make a little more sense. However it doesn’t appear that an ambulance would be called a lorry.
I think that most Europeans (including all Brits) now also use the term ‘truck’ instead of ‘lorry’.
@Kohyoongliat ,
Thanks for the clarification.
He was left unconscious after a collision with a lorry.
If you delete left most people would still infer that he was unconscious as a result of the collision. If you leave left in, the sentence is a bit more explicit.
Apparently I completely misunderstood the sentence. I was thinking along the lines that “was left with” means “remains”. They left him with the lorry. That’s why the sentence didn’t make sense.
This is far more clear. I suppose it was my fault more than the sentence structure. I totally misread it.
What about the verb “was”? The motorcyclist didn’t leave, he was left. Like in “He was left behind”, which is different from “He was behind”.
I was misunderstanding the sentence. I was thinking that someone left him. It turns out that’s not what the writer meant.
Now, to me, this would look much better:
A 60-year-old motorcyclist was left alone after an accident with a lorry in Tampines on Saturday afternoon.