Bro. Eastman, I love you but Rico is right on this one.
You have concurrent prepositional phrases. The last two "with him" and "when he was a POW" modify the first one "who stuck it out". "When he was a POW" is serving as an adverb phrase telling when she stuck it out. If he desired it to be an adverb phrase modifying the verb "cheated", then his placement would have been incorrect. In that case he should have written "When he was a POW, he cheated on the woman who stuck it out with him".
The problem with Rico's prepositional phrase; "when he was a POW", is incomplete which leads the reader to believe he cheated on his wife when he was a POW. How can McCain cheat on his wife "when" he was a POW? (unless of course he had homosexual tendancies towards his fellow soldiers) Rico might as well have said "McCain cheated on his wife "when" he was in prison". No matter how you slice what Rico said, there was a lack of clarity on the sentence itself. He could've said "He cheated on the woman who stuck it out with him 'after' he was a POW". I'm sorry, but this makes more sense in how the truth is conveyed than how Rico worded his sentence.
Again, I was content on letting the subject drop, but someone had to bring it up again for whatever reason. I do not typically care about the perfection of someone's grammar unless there is a possibility that someone could believe something that was not intended.
The problem with Rico's prepositional phrase; "when he was a POW", is incomplete which leads the reader to believe he cheated on his wife when he was a POW. How can McCain cheat on his wife "when" he was a POW? (unless of course he had homosexual tendancies towards his fellow soldiers) Rico might as well have said "McCain cheated on his wife "when" he was in prison". No matter how you slice what Rico said, there was a lack of clarity on the sentence itself. He could've said "He cheated on the woman who stuck it out with him 'after' he was a POW". I'm sorry, but this makes more sense in how the truth is conveyed than how Rico worded his sentence.
Again, I was content on letting the subject drop, but someone had to bring it up again for whatever reason. I do not typically care about the perfection of someone's grammar unless there is a possibility that someone could believe something that was not intended.
Bro Eastman, how would you word the sentence if you wanted to convey that McCain cheated on the woman who stuck with him during the difficult time period in which he was a POW?
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
Bro Eastman, how would you word the sentence if you wanted to convey that McCain cheated on the woman who stuck with him during the difficult time period in which he was a POW?
Brother Stewart, are you serious? Unless I knew for certain that McCain had the capacity to actually cheat on his wife when he was a POW, I wouldn't have said what Rico said unless He had some way to cheat when he was a POW.
Rico's statement was worded correctly if McCain did indeed cheat on his wife; however, as was stated before, he didn't actually cheat on his wife when he was a POW. Not only that, Rico did not actually state a specific time frame, herein lies the unclarity of his post.
Brother Stewart, are you serious? Unless I knew for certain that McCain had the capacity to actually cheat on his wife when he was a POW, I wouldn't have said what Rico said unless He had some way to cheat when he was a POW.
Rico's statement was worded correctly if McCain did indeed cheat on his wife; however, as was stated before, he didn't actually cheat on his wife when he was a POW. Not only that, Rico did not actually state a specific time frame, herein lies the unclarity of his post.
Bro Eastman, the way the sentence is worded, it is not saying that McCain cheated when he was a POW. It's saying that his wife stuck by him when he was a POW.
__________________
There are no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, Chuck Norris lives in Houston.
Either the United States will destroy ignorance, or ignorance will destroy the United States. – W.E.B. DuBois
Bro Eastman, the way the sentence is worded, it is not saying that McCain cheated when he was a POW. It's saying that his wife stuck by him when he was a POW.
Thanks for clearing that up, that sentence was a real Swiss Cake Roll!
Bro Eastman, the way the sentence is worded, it is not saying that McCain cheated when he was a POW. It's saying that his wife stuck by him when he was a POW.
BrotherEastman walks in *Sheepishly grins as he slowly realizes how he made the mistake* OMG! What can I say? I had to read this sentence to where I now have it memorized before I realize that Rico may be right about me being from Kentucky (although I'm actually from southern Indiana, which is close enough). I see the mistake I have presumptuously made and I feel as though I owe Rico a big apology.
BrotherEastman walks in *Sheepishly grins as he slowly realizes how he made the mistake* OMG! What can I say? I had to read this sentence to where I now have it memorized before I realize that Rico may be right about me being from Kentucky (although I'm actually from southern Indiana, which is close enough). I see the mistake I have presumptuously made and I feel as though I owe Rico a big apology.
No apology necessary, Brother. That's what friends are for. We can fuss and no apologies are needed to know we're still friends. God bless you.
OMG! What can I say? I had to read this sentence to where I now have it memorized before I realize that Rico may be right about me being from Kentucky (although I'm actually from southern Indiana, which is close enough). I see the mistake I have presumptuously made and I feel as though I owe Rico a big apology.
Hybrid Mode
