文法問題~~~~極度需要英文高手

1. Why buy a mountain bike if the cycling paths available are too far away or too short?

翻譯 - 為什麼買一輛爬山單車，如果可用的單車路徑是太過遠或太短 ge？ 點解唔係 available 前面加 are? available 喺呢度是形容詞 (adjective) , 形容 cycling paths (cycling paths available = available cycling paths ) 如果 available 前面加 are , available 就變咗係 adverb if the cycling paths are available = 如果有冇用得ge 單車路徑 ……….. 就有完全不同的用義 ! 2. put people in risk 係錯 put people to risk 亦都係錯 啱嘅就係 put people at risk Example sentence: The government should not put people at risk by building nuclear reactors near a big city.

2011-04-22 04:05:26 補充：
Actually the correct sentence should be:
The government should not put people's lives at risk by building nuclear reactors near a big city.

2011-04-22 17:53:50 補充：
It should be "They would not SUBJECT those people TO risk"

Whoever wrote that sentence was being creative !

http://thesaurus.com/browse/put+at+risk

發問者: If mountain bikers understood ..., they would not put (vt) those people to risk[ 動詞不定式(infinitive)]. [ 他們不會使那些人去冒險] ; 此句英文語法正確 . e.g. Let's put all the children to work.[咱們讓孩子們都 忙起來]

2011-04-23 13:54:00 補充：
eicachan: e.g. They asked the cyclist," why didn't you ring?" Please ring if you need help. It was a risky thing to do. If you think that the sentence "they would not put those people to risk" is incorrect, in that case,I have nothing to say more.

1).why buy a mountain bike if the cycling paths available are too far away or too short?

Putting "are" in front of "available" will add a second "main verb" to the sentence, thus making it wrong.

As Waiman has suggested, you could add "which are" in front of "available", to make "which are available" a relative clause, so it will be grammatically correct, but simply using "availlable" as an adjective is more concise. Actually, "available" can be placed in front of "cycling paths" as will.

The meaning of the sentence is this:
Why would you want to (spend a lot of money to) buy a mountain bike, if the available cycling paths are either too far away (so you have to travel a long way on the mountain bike to get to the paths) or are too short (such that you can finish cycling in minutes, making the mountain bike uncecessary) ?

2) Put people to risk

As Pepe Poirot has pointed out, both "put people to risk" and "put people in risk" are incorrect. This may be difficult to explain, but the combination of certain preposition with a specific noun do carry a specific meaning, so "at risk", "at ease", "in balance", "on target", "on time" etc. can not be replaced with other combinations such as "in risk", "in ease", "at target" etc. I don't know the reason, but someone with a more in-depth knowledge of grammar might have the answer.

What I do know is that we could say: "put people at risk", or "expose people to (greater) risk".










2011-04-22 10:21:00 補充：
correction: 2nd paragraph: "as well", not "as will".

Why buy a mountain bike if the cycling paths available are too far away or too short? - a correct question because a road bike is good enough already, so there is no need to buy a mountain bike which is somewhat obsolete.

2011-04-23 10:20:15 補充：
"at risk" is correct because it is an idiomatic phrase- preposition + noun.
"to risk" is incorrect even if 'risk' is used as a verb. It being a transitive verb has to be followed by an object such as "their lives".

Why not buy/don't you a mountain bike if the cycling paths (which are) available(adj) are too far away or too short?
availably(adv)

2011-04-22 05:10:43 補充：
correction : Why not buy... ?/Why don't you buy ... ?