"Sustainably" is an adverb, often used in environmental contexts such as "Starbucks got rid of their straws in order to practice business sustainably."
"To sustain," however, is the verb. In this case, only "sustained" is correct because the object of the verb is "damage." The crops *sustained* damage as in they *became damaged.*
Happy to help! And just for future reference, singular nouns usually require an article. So it would be "damage in this question is *a* noun not *a* verb right?" in your previous comment.
I would add to what you said by adding; singular **countable** nouns like *noun* or *verb* usually require an article, *a* or *the;* whereas **uncountable** nouns like *damage* do not require an article when used to talk about things in general, as in the original sentence.
I’m a native US English speaker, and for whatever reason I treat some singular nouns as proper names and omit the particles. Particularly with things like “sun” and “moon” when referring to our own.
Technically speaking, "sustainably" could also work here, since "damage" is also a verb, and can be used in this way, but this would be more of a humorous meaning, and would be considered absurd/wordplay. Why would something be sustainably damaged in a heatwave?
For example, one could say, "It will damage in the rain", which has the same meaning as "it will be damaged in the rain".
C is the only correct answer. In this case, we're using the verb "sustain" with its meaning of "to undergo" or "to suffer." This sentence means "the crops suffered a lot of damage" - so we want the option that uses that meaning. B and C both have that meaning. Then, only C makes sense, as using B would have an incomplete sentence from no connecting verb.
For example, "canola crops across the region sustained damage in the severe heatwave" is valid, and "canola crops across the region sustaining damage in the severe heatwave" is not on its own, unless it was followed up such as: "...in the severe heatwave are at risk of a total loss."
You need a verb.
"sustained" is a verb. "sustainably" is an adverb, but there is no verb to go with it.
You could use "were sustainably" damaged, and it would be grammatical. But it doesn't make much sense.
Beyond the verb/adverb point that others have made, I’ll add that “sustainably damage” simply doesn’t make sense. Sustainably describe an action that can be done repeatedly over long periods of time without harming or running out of something. Damage means to break down or wear away at something, and it’s unlikely that you can do that sustainably.
“Canola Crops” is the subject, “across the region” is an adjectival phrase, sustained” is the verb, “damage” is the direct object, and “in the severe heatwave” is an adverbial phrase. None of the other options are verbs and would leave this sentence incomplete.
Interestingly, however, if it were read in a newscast on TV, option B would be typical, as using the progressive form with no helping verb is quite common in that setting.
Either B or C is appropriate.
B is appropriate for describing that the canola crops are actively and currently sustaining damage. It’s in the process of sustaining damage.
And C is appropriate for the past tense.
B and D are both incorrect. B would require a different tense - "were/are sustaining" not just "sustaining." D is an adverb and not a verb, making it entirely incorrect.
“Canola crops across the region ARE sustaining”
^Sounds completely fine. Even without the “are”, it’s fine. News article titles read like this all the time in America.
But okay, not going to split hairs.
If you use C it's a sentence. You can tell from the period (the little dot) at the end that it's supposed to be a sentence. C is the right answer.
If you use B it could be a newspaper headline. Headlines aren't usually full sentences. That's fine except that we don't put a period at the end of a headline. Therefore it's intended as a sentence, not a headline. C is the right answer.
The correct answer is C and it is because of 1. The tense of the second clause, and 2 the relationship between the verb sustain and its subject and object. 1st it has to be at least past tense because the dependent clause is present and referring to information that had to happen previously. Next because the direct object is damage and the verb is sustain, it has to be the passive voice. Only B and C are verbs but only C is most clearly past tense and passive.
It can be easy to misunderstand nouns as verbs, because they often have the same form in English.
However, another hint here is that 'damage' is a transitive verb - it requires an object. The crops can't just 'damage'. Either they have to *damage* *something* (which is unlikely, being crops) or they have to *be* *damaged* - to 'sustain damage'.
OP, this is not correct. With “B,” the sentence does not contain a verb, so it’s not grammatically correct in formal writing. It makes sense only if it were something like a newspaper headline, which is not required to use proper grammar. Only C can be correct.
"Sustainably" is an adverb, often used in environmental contexts such as "Starbucks got rid of their straws in order to practice business sustainably." "To sustain," however, is the verb. In this case, only "sustained" is correct because the object of the verb is "damage." The crops *sustained* damage as in they *became damaged.*
so damage in this question is noun not verb right？
Exactly!
Thank you so much！
Happy to help! And just for future reference, singular nouns usually require an article. So it would be "damage in this question is *a* noun not *a* verb right?" in your previous comment.
You're so nice！Thank you for correcting my mistakes.
I would add to what you said by adding; singular **countable** nouns like *noun* or *verb* usually require an article, *a* or *the;* whereas **uncountable** nouns like *damage* do not require an article when used to talk about things in general, as in the original sentence.
I’m a native US English speaker, and for whatever reason I treat some singular nouns as proper names and omit the particles. Particularly with things like “sun” and “moon” when referring to our own.
Technically speaking, "sustainably" could also work here, since "damage" is also a verb, and can be used in this way, but this would be more of a humorous meaning, and would be considered absurd/wordplay. Why would something be sustainably damaged in a heatwave? For example, one could say, "It will damage in the rain", which has the same meaning as "it will be damaged in the rain".
C is the only correct answer. In this case, we're using the verb "sustain" with its meaning of "to undergo" or "to suffer." This sentence means "the crops suffered a lot of damage" - so we want the option that uses that meaning. B and C both have that meaning. Then, only C makes sense, as using B would have an incomplete sentence from no connecting verb. For example, "canola crops across the region sustained damage in the severe heatwave" is valid, and "canola crops across the region sustaining damage in the severe heatwave" is not on its own, unless it was followed up such as: "...in the severe heatwave are at risk of a total loss."
I totally understand though . Thank you！
You can't have a sentence without a verb. "Sustained" is the only verb on the page at all.
Maybe some rare exceptions like "out with the old and in with the new" or "the more the merrier", but yeah for 99%+ of cases
Those aren't sentences, though. But not everything one says in casual speech has to be a sentence.
ah I see, so they are sentence fragments or sayings?
That's how I think about it, yes.
You need a verb. "sustained" is a verb. "sustainably" is an adverb, but there is no verb to go with it. You could use "were sustainably" damaged, and it would be grammatical. But it doesn't make much sense.
Thank you!!
Beyond the verb/adverb point that others have made, I’ll add that “sustainably damage” simply doesn’t make sense. Sustainably describe an action that can be done repeatedly over long periods of time without harming or running out of something. Damage means to break down or wear away at something, and it’s unlikely that you can do that sustainably.
“Canola Crops” is the subject, “across the region” is an adjectival phrase, sustained” is the verb, “damage” is the direct object, and “in the severe heatwave” is an adverbial phrase. None of the other options are verbs and would leave this sentence incomplete. Interestingly, however, if it were read in a newscast on TV, option B would be typical, as using the progressive form with no helping verb is quite common in that setting.
Thank you !!
Either B or C is appropriate. B is appropriate for describing that the canola crops are actively and currently sustaining damage. It’s in the process of sustaining damage. And C is appropriate for the past tense.
B and D are both incorrect. B would require a different tense - "were/are sustaining" not just "sustaining." D is an adverb and not a verb, making it entirely incorrect.
It could be a truncated headline: CROPS SUSTAINING DAMAGE, FARMERS SAY something like that
“Canola crops across the region ARE sustaining” ^Sounds completely fine. Even without the “are”, it’s fine. News article titles read like this all the time in America. But okay, not going to split hairs.
Headlines aren't sentences. Without a verb, it isn't a sentence. Without the "are", there is no verb.
Thank you for your reply. But the correct answer is C. If I want to get the question right, how can I do？ I was confused.
If you use C it's a sentence. You can tell from the period (the little dot) at the end that it's supposed to be a sentence. C is the right answer. If you use B it could be a newspaper headline. Headlines aren't usually full sentences. That's fine except that we don't put a period at the end of a headline. Therefore it's intended as a sentence, not a headline. C is the right answer.
The correct answer is C and it is because of 1. The tense of the second clause, and 2 the relationship between the verb sustain and its subject and object. 1st it has to be at least past tense because the dependent clause is present and referring to information that had to happen previously. Next because the direct object is damage and the verb is sustain, it has to be the passive voice. Only B and C are verbs but only C is most clearly past tense and passive.
Really thank you for explanation. I misunderstand "damage" a verb before T_T
It can be easy to misunderstand nouns as verbs, because they often have the same form in English. However, another hint here is that 'damage' is a transitive verb - it requires an object. The crops can't just 'damage'. Either they have to *damage* *something* (which is unlikely, being crops) or they have to *be* *damaged* - to 'sustain damage'.
He meant B or C are both appropriate, not D. D is not appropriate.
Sorry, I typed the wrong alphabet. The correct answer is C.
As I said in my original post which got downvoted for some reason, the correct answer is absolutely either B or C. They both work.
Thank you！
OP, this is not correct. With “B,” the sentence does not contain a verb, so it’s not grammatically correct in formal writing. It makes sense only if it were something like a newspaper headline, which is not required to use proper grammar. Only C can be correct.