7

Orders came flooding in for hemp oil, seeds, lotions, shampoos and conditioners.

I'm trying to translate a sentence very similar to this one, and it seems to me that the verb is 'to come in', and 'flooding' is an adverb. It that correct?

Nima Abna
  • 159
  • 8

1 Answers1

8

Here 'come' is a verb and 'flood in' is a verb.

'Flood in' - To move quickly into some place or thing in large numbers Source

Here it is using the gerund form 'flooding in'.

'come' - Move or travel towards the speaker. Source

So the orders are arriving at the speaker in large, sudden and/or unexpected numbers

Some more examples and analysis can be found here

ededededed87
  • 2,425
  • 5
  • 9
  • 1
    Orders don't arrive to. It's the wrong preposition. They can arrive at (the warehouse), in (the store), on (site) (along with other prepositions such as behind time and without delay.) But they don't arrive to. – Ronald Sole Nov 23 '20 at 18:53
  • "Came" is redundant here. Where else would the orders be going to? "Orders flooded in for hemp oil..." would be simpler. Or "Orders began to flood in..." – alephzero Nov 23 '20 at 22:24
  • 2
    @alephzero 'came flooding in' is a very common usage. It is often desirable to use 'ing' words rather than 'ed' words, as it can make for more active, engaging, and vibrant speech. – eps Nov 23 '20 at 22:31
  • @RonaldSole I believe I used 'to' to mean that from the speakers perspective the orders are arriving. To me 'at' seems like the orders have appeared whether the speaker cares or not and 'to' gives the sense of the speaker waiting for them. On further investigation it seems 'arrive to' has seen a recent increase in popularity. Perhaps I should have used the more clear and common 'at' for the purpose of ELL but that phrasing seemed a bit flat to me. Thank you – ededededed87 Nov 24 '20 at 08:06
  • @ededededed87 I have never come across the use of to in that context and for me it jars. I can't imagine arrive to him / her / them. I can see it in a construction such as: The carpenter will arrive to fix the door this morning. But here it is acting as part of the infinitive. Can you find any examples of its use as you suggest? – Ronald Sole Nov 24 '20 at 15:44
  • @RonaldSole It seems like it is a grammatical mistake that is gaining traction, so maybe I have just heard this mistake enough that it sounds normal to me. It appears to be more common in British English which may explain it if you are from somewhere else. I think personally I would be inclined to use 'at' for inanimate objects and 'to' for people, but I recognise that this seems to be incorrect. I will update my post to reflect this. – ededededed87 Nov 25 '20 at 08:45