| ▲ | hulitu 6 hours ago | |
> thought extinct for 6000 years Does this makes sense for an English speaker ? | ||
| ▲ | bryanrasmussen 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
In British English it is totally reasonable and in fact relatively elegant, in American it might take a couple of seconds to figure out what was being said and it would seem ungainly for this reason. On the British elegance: in British English one could of course use "thought to be extinct" and in these kinds of structures it has become common as a stylistic touch to drop the helping infinitive, "to be", considering it implied. | ||
| ▲ | ChrisMarshallNY 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
I don't usually use this structure, but my mother did, and she was an awesome writer. She was British, so it may be more common, over there. | ||
| ▲ | culi 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Yes but they could've used the word "considered" instead. "Possum considered extinct for 6,000 years" | ||
| ▲ | akk0 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Yes, with the caveat that it's the distinct dialect of Headlinese | ||
| ▲ | samatman 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
It's a bad sentence. They mean "thought to have gone extinct 6000 years ago". But some allowance for headline constraints should be given. | ||
| ▲ | mistrial9 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
yes I recognize that as legitimate grammar, in a literary way.. It can be spoken that way, too.. | ||