1) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as in yours.
2) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as in yours.

3) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as there was in yours.
4) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as there was in yours.

Which are grammatical and work if the intended meaning is:

Your plan had flaws. If his doesn't, we'll approve it.

Gratefully,
Navi

Lost in the Twilight Zone of the English language
Obsessed with ambiguity
Interested in strange constructs

Op 27/03/2024 om 21:56 schreef navi:
> 1) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as in yours.
> 2) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as in yours.
>
> 3) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as there was in
> yours.
> 4) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as there was in
> yours.
>
> Which are grammatical and work if the intended meaning is:
>
> Your plan had flaws. If his doesn't, we'll approve it.

As a non-native speaker I "understood" all four.
But meseems in 3) and 4) you want
.... as there were in yours. (ie, flaws)

--
guido wugi

Remember when wugi bragged outrageously? That was Wednesday:
> Op 27/03/2024 om 21:56 schreef navi:
>> 1) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as in yours.
>> 2) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as in yours.
>>
>> 3) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as there was in
>> yours.
>> 4) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as there was in
>> yours.
>>
>> Which are grammatical and work if the intended meaning is:
>>
>> Your plan had flaws. If his doesn't, we'll approve it.
>
> As a non-native speaker I "understood" all four.
> But meseems in 3) and 4) you want
> ... as there were in yours. (ie, flaws)

All four are horrible. I like the unnumbered "it is supposed to mean",
but I might be talked into

0') If his plan doesn't have flaws like yours, we'll approve it.

or 00') If his plan doesn't have the flaws yours does, we'll approve
it.

The 00') version may suggest that "we" are only looking at the possible
same flaws, but that a looser interpretation would probably be common.

/dps

--
"First thing in the morning, before I have coffee, I read the obits, If
I'm not in it, I'll have breakfast." -- Carl Reiner, to CBS News in
2015.

Le 27/03/2024 à 20:56, navi a écrit :
>
> 1) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as in yours.
> 2) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as in yours.
>
> 3) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as there was in
> yours.
> 4) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as there was in
> yours.
>
> Which are grammatical and work if the intended meaning is:
>
> [5] Your plan had flaws. If his doesn't, we'll approve it.

[5] is fine.

On 2024-03-27 20:56:25 +0000, navi said:

> 1) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as in yours.
> 2) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as in yours.
>
> 3) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it as there was in yours.
> 4) We will approve his plan if there are no flaws in it, as there was in yours.
>
> Which are grammatical and work if the intended meaning is:
>
> Your plan had flaws. If his doesn't, we'll approve it.

For the 300th time, if that's what you mean, that's what you need to
say. 1-4 are all terrible, so there is no point in trying to fix them.
Just one comment: "flaws" is plural, so it needs be followed by "were",
not "was".

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.