... to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.

[kadioguy]

[From a show called eReport]

[...]
Well, because for today's eReport, we're going to do something a little different. Instead of traveling someplace, we're going to travel back in time. We're going to look at some of our favorite eReports from the past. And we're also going to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.

[...]
Our goal for eReport has been to introduce you to fun and unique things to see and do around the island of Taiwan. We wanted you to learn about these things. We also wanted to teach you how to talk about them in English. Through eReport, we've learned how to do challenging things like ski and ballroom dance. We've also made delicious things like dumplings and cakes. We've also visited the top of Alishan as well as the bottom of the Grand Hotel. What has been your favorite adventure so far? There are so many to choose from.
----
1. Is it possible to use "in" instead of "from" in the original sentences? If it is, could you tell me the difference in meaning between them, if any?

2. I assume that the "wanted" in the original sentences is to soften his expressions, as jutfrank said in this thread. So "want" would also be okay, but it is a little more strongly worded. Is that right?
---
[Source] at 0:52 and 1:29

 

[5jj]

[From a show called eReport]

[...]
We're going to look at some of our favorite eReports from the past. And we're also going to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.

[...]
What has been your favorite adventure so far? There are so many to choose from.
----
1. Is it possible to use "in" instead of "from" in the original sentences?

Only the third of those froms could be replaced by in.

2. I assume that the "wanted" in the original sentences is to soften his expressions,

No. It's the usual meaning of want.

 

[kadioguy]

Only the third of those froms could be replaced by in.

Do you mean that "There are so many to choose from" could be replaced by "There are so many to choose in", while others don't? Could you tell me why?

No. it's the usual meaning of want.

But then why not just use "want"?

 

[5jj]

Do you mean that "There are so many to choose from" could be replaced by "There are so many to choose in", while others don't?

No. Count again

But then why not just use "want"?

I thought you were asking about the use of the verb, not of the tense. The writers used the past tense because they were talking about past time.

 

[kadioguy]

No. Count again

[From a show called eReport]
[...]
We're going to look at some of our favorite eReports from the past. And we're also going to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.
---
Okay, so you mean this one could be replaced by in: ... to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.

a. We're going to look at some of our favorite eReports from the past.

b. ... to show you some things you've never seen before from our old eReports.

And I assume that (a) couldn't, because the reference time point is now. We're (now) going to look at some eReports, and they are from/have been taken from the past.

While (b) could use "in", since "you've never seen before" can refer to either now or past.

Right?

I thought you were asking about the use of the verb, not of the tense. The writers used the past tense because they were talking about past time.

Yes, I was asking about the use. I thought that "want" could work, why "wanted"?

So you mean that it is like this:

Our goal for eReport has been to introduce you to fun and unique things ... . (We established the program since) We wanted you to learn about these things. We also wanted to teach you how to talk about them in English.

But I think that "want" could also work there, meaning we always want ...

Is that right?

 

[5jj]

But I think that "want" could also work there, meaning we always want ...

Is that right?

It could work there, but it's saying something different from the original. The original is fine as it is.

 

[kadioguy]

It could work there, but it's saying something different from the original. The original is fine as it is.

Could you please tell if you agree with my thoughts about the first question in post #5?