Here is another summary of the reading titled “Party Politics” written by Judith Martin. Could someone help me correct my grammaatical mistakes? I would appreciate him very much.
The author first introduces office parties as a good occasion for employees to have a rest and a good time and points out that even though freed from work, both employers and employees need to observe the etiquette. According to the author, there are five major problems in a business party. First, the hospitable boss finds employees tend to have a fear of and avoid him in the party. Guests mostly complain about their names on the invitation. Also, a desire for a relationship with lower-level or higher-level fellows will bring about enduring problems. As for workday concerns, some employees seek for promotion whereas others offer the boss their opinions and suggestion on work. Last, those who have no idea about evening dress fall into a dilemma. The author suggests that the rules of party etiquette are the key to addressing these problems. The invitation should be involved with all guests’ names. To show employees the boss’s gratitude, employers need to establish a receiving line in the beginning and at the end respectively; employees should be dressed properly, give a hand to those in an awkward position and express thanks to the boss before leaving.
Hi, I think it is very good. Here are a couple of suggestions:
Many thanks for your suggestions. And I have a question in today’s learning. It is from an exercise book. Here is the sentence: One reason could be some children do not get the food they need. I think it is wrong and the word "that’ should be added between “be” and “some”. Could you tell me if the word "that’ can be omitted?
Hi, I found this helpful explanation here: https://www.ef.edu/english-resources/english-grammar/defining-relative-clauses/
INCLUDING OR OMITTING THE RELATIVE PRONOUN
The relative pronoun can only be omitted when it is the object of the clause. When the relative pronoun is the subject of the clause, it cannot be omitted. You can usually tell when a relative pronoun is the object of the clause because it is followed by another subject + verb. See below, in the first sentence the relative pronoun cannot be ommitted because it is the subject of the relative clause (“the woman spoke”). In the second sentence, the pronoun can be omitted because “the woman” is the object of the verb “loved”.
| Noun, subject of the main clause | Relative pronoun | Verb + rest of relative clause | Verb + rest of main clause |
|---|---|---|---|
| The woman | that | spoke at the meeting | was very knowledgeable. |
| The woman | (that) | the man loved | was living in New York. |
Hopefully this is clear to you. The main point is if “that” serves as the object of the clause it can be omitted, while if “that” serves as the subject of the clause it cannot be omitted. In your example,
One reason could be some children do not get the food that they need.
The relative clause could be written, “they need that”. Here “that” is the object of “need”, not the subject, so “that” can be omitted. Please let me know if it does not make sense to you.
I’m sorry to reply you so late because of my computer’s fault. Thank you very much for your explanation. What confuses me is that “some children do not get the food they need” is the predicate. Should “that” be added between the verb and the predicate?
Oh, I see, there can be two "that"s in this sentence.
One reason could be that some children do not get the food that they need.
Both of these "that"s are optional because each of them is the object, not the subject of their verb.
The first is “reason could be that”. Here “reason” is the subject and “that” is the object, so “that” can be omitted.
The second is “they need that”. Once again, “that” is the object and so it can be omitted.
Compare it to the second sentence below:
The families’ crops have failed. That is why their children do not get the food that will nourish them.
Once again, this sentence has two "that"s, but in this case, both of them serve as subjects and so both are required and cannot be omitted.
Many thanks for your explanation. Now I can understand it.