The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

The vehicle seemed to be moving at a fast pace... Options
Koh Elaine
Posted: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 1:00:52 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 2,422
Neurons: 10,011
An accident along Woodlands Ave 12 involving multiple vehicles has occurred at about 7:34pm on 7th of August 2017. The vehicle seemed to be going at a fast pace when it lost control, hitting the traffic light on the road divider and then turning into the opposite lane, hitting 2 motorcyclists and 1 lorry.

1. Can I use 'driver' instead of 'vehicle'?
2. Are there any errors in the text?

Thanks.

Hello moderators,

Please delete the other two duplicate posts for me. I cannot do so on my side. (I submitted one and now I discovered I have three instead. What is happening? Thanks.)

Thanks.

Elaine

thar
Posted: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 4:21:47 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 15,754
Neurons: 62,972
It changes the implication.

If you describe what the vehicle did, that is just factual. The vehicle has no intent, it doesn't make any decisions.


If you describe what the driver did, that implies intent. The driver made a conscious decision to do that.

A report has to be careful - a person is innocent until proven guilty. A reporter can't say what the driver was doing.

The diver was going at speed = the driver was speeding (= a crime)
The driver hit a motorcyclist (if he dies = vehicular homicide).

If you say what the car did, there is no implication of the actions of the driver. Maybe the accelerator got stuck. Maybe the driver had already collapsed and was unconscious?. Maybe.....anything.
Presumably the car hit the motorcyclist despite the efforts of the driver to miss them (if the driver was still conscious).
The fact is, the car hit them.
It is up to the courts to decide whether the driver hit them!


Some mistakes:

This is a factual report and it gives the time - therefore it is simple past.

An accident occurred at 7.34 on 7 August.

You would only use the present perfect if it effects the present.
Eg.
The road is closed because an accident has occurred.
But then, you don't include the time it happened.

2
You don't say 'about' and give the time to the exact minute!
It occurred at 7.34.
(You know because of CCTV, or because people called the police at that exact minute)
A report put together some time after the incident, when all the facts are available, might say this.

But
It occurred at about/around 7.30
This is enough information to appeal for witnesses, or show the general time. That is all you know, at the scene.
This is what a report written shortly after the accident would say.

3
Woodlands Ave 12.
Is that Ave 12 in Woodlands?
In which case you would put it that way round.


4
Just a style point.
You don't need to specify 'one lorry' this isn't a bowling competition!
It is more natural to keep it simple:
Two motorcyclists and a lorry.
There is also an inconsistency there, that you are listing people then vehicles in the same list. To be consistent you would make it a list of vehicles:
Two motorcycles and a lorry.
It would be assumed that on a road, these come with riders on top!
But I can see why you might want to make it more personal by saying people were hit.


Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.