Korean Job Discussion Forums

[YTMND]

Below are 2 parts from a reading in a book we are using. It seems like the word "instead" is not correctly used, and they should have used "like" or "as in". I don't know if this was a translation or if it was originally written in English.

I think talking and coughing or sneezing would be examples associated with an air-borne disease. If the word "instead" is supposed to be there, then are they making a specific distinction between air and water? Any feedback would be appreciated. My class was confused about this, and I didn't see a problem until I saw the word "instead".

"We were lucky in terms of the virus itself, which didn't spread quickly and was not an air-borne disease."

"If SARS were an air-borne disease, instead of being spread in droplets of water emitted by talking, coughing or sneezing, then the disease would have been much worse."

[TDC troll]

The SARS virus was one that was , directly , transmitted from person to person ; through respiratory droplets .

These droplets were contained in sweat , mucous , and phlegm .
The SARS virus was not considered to be an air-borne virus .
To have have been an air-borne virus , the virus would have had to
traveled on dust particles .

I understand why you would question the sentence.
It is in fact correct though .

[YTMND]

Can you comment why they use "instead of"?

"If SARS were an air-borne disease, instead of being spread in droplets of water emitted by talking, coughing or sneezing, then the disease would have been much worse."

compare with:

"If SARS were an air-borne disease instead, being spread in droplets of water emitted by talking, coughing or sneezing, then the disease would have been much worse."

Again, I think this is a mistranslation.

And there is another question. You call SARS a virus, but there is a virus which causes SARS. It is stated that SARS is a disease, not a virus.

[The Cosmic Hum]

[transmogrifier]

I think the problem is the first comma. When you read the sentence quickly, it is easy to mistake the comma as a marker signifying the start of the second clause of the conditional, hence the confusion that follows when the rest of the sentence doesn't jibe with that assumption/

Even though the sentence is technically fine, a good writer would know to avoid this possible confusion by either removing the first comma or rewriting the sentence:

1. "If SARS was an air-borne disease instead of being spread in droplets of water emitted by talking, coughing or sneezing, then the disease would have been much worse."

2. "The disease would have been much worse if SARS, which is actually spread in droplets of water emitted by talking, coughing or sneezing, was an air-borne disease."

[YTMND]