The order in trio , required, to

Question

These two possible combinations confuse me:

The energy required to heat the water is...

The required energy to heat the water is...

I have always used the first combination, but the AI grammar check generally prefer the second option. Which combination is in your opinion the correct/better one? Why?

What are your reasons for thinking one is better than the other? Please cite your sources, other than "the AI grammar check." — alphabet, May 14 '23 at 22:29
@alphabet I am not claiming anything, this is what I want to find out. Which of these versions is better/appropriate for technical writing? What is wrong with my question to deserve -1? — Pygmalion, May 15 '23 at 05:48
Possibly a duplicate: the order of modification in English: nouns preceding or succeeding? ('while postpositive adjectives are the exception, with phrases postpositive positioning is the rule not the exception': @tchrist). Though in this question, also involved is the fact that 'required to heat the water' involves the colligation 'required to [inf + DO]' and is best not split. — Edwin Ashworth, May 15 '23 at 11:53
What is the rest of the sentence? This may affect the preferred order. — Tinfoil Hat, May 16 '23 at 02:29

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered May 15 '23 at 08:47

3

The first version is much better for two reasons:

You get to the subject of the sentence quicker. The subject is much stronger than an adjective, so it sounds odd to begin with the weaker word.
It puts "required" closer to the reason the energy is required.

answered May 15 '23 at 08:47

Eleonora

46

1

Yes; 'required to [V...]' is a strong colligation ('required to heat the water' sits far better together as a single string, and as a premodifier {'The required-to-heat-the-water energy'} is ghastly). – Edwin Ashworth May 15 '23 at 11:47
@EdwinAshworth Thank you for the answer. Your answer just opened a new question for me: is this colligation argument true for "for" instead of "to"? Say, "the energy required for ventilation" instead of "the required energy for ventilation"? Maybe I should open a new question? – Pygmalion May 15 '23 at 14:42
No; it's essentially still the same and the general case has been covered ... 'required for' is again a colligation (the syntactic equivalent of 'collocation'). – Edwin Ashworth May 15 '23 at 18:33

The order in trio , required, to

1 Answers1