another group

This is the place to post questions and discussions on usage and style. The members of the Wordwizard Clubhouse will also often be able to help you to formulate that difficult letter.
Post Reply

another group

Post by navi » Thu Jul 16, 2020 5:11 am

Are these sentences correct:

1) They tested the medication on a group of forty five people and are now going to test it on a new group of six hundred.


2) They tested the medication on a group of forty five people and are now going to test it on another group of six hundred.



My problem is that when I hear 'a new group of six hundred' I tend to think that the old group also was a group of six hundred. That is not the case here. I think '1' and '2' work. Maybe technically we need a comma before 'of six hundred'?

Gratefully,
Navi
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: another group

Post by Erik_Kowal » Thu Jul 16, 2020 3:09 pm

I read it differently. The group of 600 mentioned in 2) seems more likely to me than the one mentioned in 1) to be an additional set of 600.

In both 1) and 2), a comma would help to disambiguate the meaning. But it would be simpler (and more elegant) just to reword the tail end of the sentence:

"...and are now going to test it on a group of six hundred".

No need to include either 'new' or 'another'.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: another group

Post by Phil White » Sat Jul 18, 2020 9:36 pm

Pragmatics.
It would be strange scientific practice to include a first group of people already tested within a second group to be tested. Not impossible, but odd. Thus, it would probably be wilful to understand it that way.

But for all practical purposes, what is either sentence intended to convey? Not that tests with a small group (45) have been completed, they intend testing a larger group of 600. Both sentences suffice to convey that information.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Phil White
Non sum felix lepus

ACCESS_END_OF_TOPIC
Post Reply