|
By:
Yes.
|
|
By:
Yes, assuming that incorrrect means incorrect.
|
|
By:
'unbreathing'
![]() ![]() |
|
By:
It's correct. Unbreathing is a word.
|
|
By:
Not breathing. Not correct.
|
|
By:
Definition of unbreathing
: not breathing; especially : holding one's breath |
|
By:
He could had been asleep and holding his breath.
|
|
By:
Whether it's correct or not, it's clumsy and obtuse writing, like it's been written by a robot.
|
|
By:
crags,
everydays a school day then here ... |
|
By:
*everyday's a school day when here ...
|
|
By:
This ungreat thread could turn into a great one.
|
|
By:
They may have thought he was pretending to be dead, they weren't to know, not until they checked he was dead.
|
|
By:
He could have been one of the undead, yes.
|
|
By:
Correct, yes, I don't see a problem. Sentence scans ok. Breathless is a different thing altogther.
There is no word I can think of better than unbreathing. My quible might be the ", and". Thats what I'd focus on. I'd suggest it should be , or and, not both. |
|
By:
but how did they discover the man was in his 50s?
|
|
By:
ID on him with DOB?
|
|
By:
they should have tried to resuscitate him first before going through his wallet.
|
|
By:
Possibly he was one of the UNDEAD ?
|
|
By:
ununfückingbelievable
|
|
By:
Shows what happens when an organization spends millions recruiting undermanagers instead of thousands recruiting sub-editors.
They arrived to discover a man in his 50s unconscious and not breathing, who was pronounced dead at the scene. |
|
By:
I think they should have included more detail.
They arrived to discover a man in his 50s unconscious and not breathing, who was pronounced dead at the scene by an alert woman in her 40s breathing heavily. |
|
By:
they arrived and discovered..
|
|
By:
it is better not to use `to discover`
`only to discover` is acceptable in some cases but in this case `and discovered` is better |
|
By:
was it their purpose to discover a man? no.
|
|
By:
there purpose was merely to arrive, after that they would discover whatever happened to be there to discover
|
|
By:
bad spelling
|
|
By:
is there any time it is ok to use the phrase `to discover`?
no |
|
By:
you might say, to try and discover
or with the intention of discovering or in the hope of discovering or by mere chance i discovered or with perserverence and some good luck we discovered and others but not `to discover` |
|
By:
BBC British?
|
|
By:
Re "to discover" ; you can certainly say " arrived , only to discover...".
|
|
By:
^ quite right, that is what i said.
`only to discover` is acceptable in some cases, including in this case `and discovered` may be better, but is also acceptable `to discover` is not |
|
By:
the reason `only to discover` may not be ideal is beause it hints that thay may have been surprised at the discovery...but of course if they had been called out it should not have been a surprise, assuming they were properly trained emergency professionals.
|
|
By:
perhaps `only to find` would be better
i starting to doubt that discover is the right word, perhaps not |
|
By:
`and found` is better again,
1)and found a man in his 50s 2)only to find a man in his 50s 3)and discovered a man in his 50s 4)only to discover a man in his 50s these are acceptable, in order of preference? to discover is not, for reasons given. |
|
By:
no there would seem to be only 2 acceptable..
1) and found a man 2) and discovered a man |
|
By:
i clicked on a thread on chit chat to discover lfc was up to his usual trick
![]() who would find this sentence unacceptable? perhaps someone who was mad ![]() |
|
By:
no swagman i have taken a look around and am pleased to report that only about 87% of the worlds population are mad.
some countries are almost totally insane. they shall remain nameless what`s wrong with me? nothing at all, nothing at all. |
|
By:
i dare to say that i am completely fine
|
|
By:
it is just today is a rare exception.
|