Community Web Version Now Available
秉奇
There are not only lots of historic sites (that are) worth visiting in the ancient city, but also... a. There are not only lots of historic sites (that are) worth visiting in the ancient city, but also many restaurants that you cannot miss. b. There are not only lots of historic sites (that are) worth a visit in the ancient city, but also many restaurants that you cannot miss. Are both the sentences correct? If not, how should I revise them? Which sentence is better? Why? In sentecne a and b, is it better to keep "that are" or to delete them? Can the verb "miss" collocate with the noun "restaurants"? Thanks!
Oct 19, 2016 12:12 PM
5
1
Answers · 5
They are both ok. Sentence A is better because it is more commonly used. Sentence B might be better if you wanted to sound a little more whimsical. Keep "that are" in both sentences. Miss and restaurant work fine together.
October 19, 2016
They are both perfectly correct and completely natural. There is no important difference in meaning. "Worth a visit" is a very slightly weaker. It sounds a little offhand and less sincere. Taken literally, it suggests that the site is worth only one visit and no more. "In Boston, the Museum of Fine Arts and the Museum of Science are worth visiting. If you have time, the Mapparium in the Christian Science complex is worth a visit, too."
October 19, 2016
In the second sentence, it seems odd to me when I read " [...] historic sites (that are) worth A VISIT". As far as I know, the verb worth must be followed by a noun like in the first sentence with "visiting". However, it would be better if you change it to passive voice. Then you'd get: " [...] historic sites (that are) worth to be visited"
October 19, 2016
秉奇
Language Skills
Chinese (Mandarin), English, Spanish
Learning Language
English, Spanish