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

travelled vs travelling Options
Koh Elaine
Posted: Saturday, November 10, 2018 8:08:49 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 4,360
Neurons: 17,740
CCTV footage shows the three individuals travelled in a number of vehicles from the consulate to the consul general's residence 200 metres away after Khashoggi's murder at about 3pm.

Shouldn't it be "travelling" instead?

Thanks.
NKM
Posted: Saturday, November 10, 2018 8:51:51 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 2/14/2015
Posts: 4,960
Neurons: 275,437
Location: Corinth, New York, United States
Koh Elaine wrote:
CCTV footage shows the three individuals travelled in a number of vehicles from the consulate to the consul general's residence 200 metres away after Khashoggi's murder at about 3pm.

Shouldn't it be "travelling" instead?

Thanks.

══════════════════════════════════════════════

Technically, yes — or it should be "… shows that …".

But in a newspaper article, brevity often takes precedence over technical correctness, as long as the meaning is clear. In this case the choice between the two "correct" choices would affect only the structure of the sentence, not the meaning, so the "shortcut" wording may be considered inconsequential.

ozok
Posted: Sunday, November 11, 2018 1:39:23 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 7/24/2018
Posts: 142
Neurons: 758


Note the BE/AE spelling:

travelled/traveled and travelling/traveling.





just sayin'
thar
Posted: Sunday, November 11, 2018 2:52:27 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 18,001
Neurons: 73,042
I think it is fine, it just depends on what you want to describe
what the CCTV shows
or
what happened

As a 'that' clause with 'that' omitted, I can't really see a problem, although it feels clumsy.

CCTV shows [that] the three individuals travelled.....


As a description of what the CCTV depicts, rather than the facts you deduce from that, it does make more sense, though.

CCTV shows the three individuals travelling....



I don't like the travelling 'in a number of vehicles'. A live intact person can only go in one vehicle at a time! 'Vehicles' must be more than one, and three people can only occupy a maximum of three vehicles. So it is two or three. So say something like that, not some vague 'a number of'. They seem to like long words and structures for the sake of it.

Also
...after K's murder at about 3pm
says that the murder was at about 3pm, and they travelled after that.
That is unsubstantiated speculation - the timing is not a known fact, and it is certainly not shown by this CCTV.

So, if you presume the murder occurred before the move, then:
.....after K's murder, at about 3pm
says they moved at about 3pm, and that was after the murder. That is still supposition, not fact, but at least the timing of the move is fact, as shown on CCTV.

All in all, not a good sentence in my opinion.
Koh Elaine
Posted: Sunday, November 11, 2018 7:25:10 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 4,360
Neurons: 17,740
Thanks to all of you.
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 | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.