Less-than-cosmic Grammar Question

From this thread:

ferret herder posted this sentence:
“I was leaning towards having her euthanized earlier than my husband was.”
(“her” being a pet ferret.)

fish asked for a re-phrasing of the sentence for clarity. I’ve re-read the original sentence repeatedly now, and I see nothing unclear about the original sentence. To me it reads like this:
“I was leaning towards having her euthanized earlier than my husband wasleaning towards having her euthanized.”, the italicized portion being implied by the sentence structure.

I know this is a very small deal, but if I’m missing something here, I would like to know what it is (I’m a secretary, and my grammar and spelling skills are very important to me and {usually} my bosses.)

The “was” helps, but you could argue that the sentence could be read as “I was planning on having her [the ferret] euthanized before my husband was [euthanized].”

In other words, that there were two be euthanizations, and she was leaning towards doing the ferret first, then her husband.

OOOooooh! Okay, I see it now. Thank you for the clarification (which I probably could have gotten in the other thread, but I really didn’t want to continue the hijack there).

Perhaps the rephrasing could’ve read like this:

“I was leaning towards having her euthanized earlier than was my husband.”

…rather than have “was” after husband. That would have made it clearer (although I read it as intended).

Slightly OT, I always thought it was euthanased not euthanized? I have never seen euthanized used before this post. Are both correct?

I did a quick check of the online dictionary and yes euthanized is there but not euthanased yet I have seen it in print many times. Just curious.

I assume you mean “I began leaning towards having the ferret euthanized before my husband began leaning in that direction.” Another possible interpretation of the original sentence: “I was leaning towards having her euthanized at an earlier time (e.g. by tomorrow night) than my husband (who perhaps felt the ferret should be given at least another week to live) would have preferred.” So we have at least three more or less logical readings, although the context of ferret herder’s original post would have certainly assured twickster that whatever fears twickster might have had for the husband’s safety were, thankfully, groundless.

It’s never simple with English, is it?

Good point, Sternvogel – I never even noticed that there were two possible meanings without even putting the husband in danger. What was I thinking? :smiley:

I still think the husband needs to get outta town!

jastu, one can euthanize a ferret and one can euthanatize a ferret. The process is called euthanasia. But one can’t euthanase a ferret. (This is according to Webster’s dick.)

Sorry, but that doesn’t change the sense of the sentence in any significant way. It’s still possible to read this incorrectly.

I would suggest rephrasing similarly to how the cases were described by Sternvogel:

(1) I was leaning towards getting her euthenized before my husband was.
(2) I was leaning towards getting her euthenized at an earlier point than my husband was.

I assume you mean (1)? Both could possibly be interpreted as involving euthenizing the husband, but I think they’re fairly clear.

I think for clarity you should get rid of “I was leaning” altogether.

  1. I started thinking about euthanizing her before my husband agreed that it was necessary.

  2. I thought she should be euthanized immediately, but my husband thought it could wait a few dayes.

  3. I figured I’d have the ferret euthanized first, and then have my husband put out of his misery.

The “I was leaning… before …” may not be a salvageable construction.

Thanks Zoe. This is puzzling and has really sparked my interest now.

I googled “euthanase” only to find the word appearing in Aussie, NZ or UK sites which probably explains why I have always seen it written and said this way. Unfortunately I don’t have a Macquarie dictionary handy to see if there’s an entry.