Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    jiang is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    2,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default let alone; would

    Dear teachers,
    I came across two sentences one of which I don't understand and one of which, I think, is not correct.

    No.1. A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than would the family agriculture of the past.

    My question is: Is the sentence after 'than', that is 'than would the family agriculture of the past' an inverted sentence? If it is what's the reason for doing so?

    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    I have consulted my dictionaries the subjective clause is always a negative sentence or of negative meaning when we use 'let alone'. So the sentence should be 'It should......that the diet revolution will not occur, let alone.....' Am I right?

    I am looking forward to hearing from you.

    Thank you in advance.

    Have a nice weekend.

    Jiang

  2. #2
    MikeNewYork's Avatar
    MikeNewYork is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,702
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: let alone; would

    Quote Originally Posted by jiang
    Dear teachers,
    I came across two sentences one of which I don't understand and one of which, I think, is not correct.

    No.1. A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than would the family agriculture of the past.

    My question is: Is the sentence after 'than', that is 'than would the family agriculture of the past' an inverted sentence? If it is what's the reason for doing so?
    Yes, it is an inverted clause. The first question is why the "would" is repeated. If the sentence were written without the second "would", we would have:

    A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than the family agriculture of the past.

    The meaning would be confusing. One could not tell if the food industry if the food industry was bearing a change better than family agriculture was bearing it or whether the food industry was bearing the change better than it was bearing family agriculture. So the word "would" is needed a second time. The second question is where one puts it. It could be placed at the end of the sentence:

    A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than the family agriculture of the past would.

    That would fix the problem ultimately, but the reader might still stumble when reading the part "to bear it then the family agriculture".

    So we invert the clause and move the "would" to follow than. Then it is clear. We often move the auxiliary verb in this fashion in comparisons.

    Another example:

    Mary liked the new doorman more than her boyfriend John.

    One can't tell here if Mary was comparing the doorman to her boyfriend or whether Mary's feelings were being compared to John's feelings.

    Mary liked the new doorman more than her boyfriend John did.

    The clarity is improved, but the possible stumble remains.

    Mary liked the new doorman more than did her boyfriend John.

    Clarity improved and stumbling block removed.

    This reversal is usually not necessary in short, simple comparisons, but it can be halpful in longer, more complcated ones.


    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    I have consulted my dictionaries the subjective clause is always a negative sentence or of negative meaning when we use 'let alone'. So the sentence should be 'It should......that the diet revolution will not occur, let alone.....' Am I right?
    Yes, I agree with you. The writer seemed to feel that "pessimism" was enough of a negative, but I don't agree. :wink:

  3. #3
    jiang is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    2,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: let alone; would

    :D & :?
    Dear Mike,
    Thank you very much for your explanations. Now I understand the first question well.

    I still don't quite understand the second one:
    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    If 'let alone' is a conjunction, why is there another conjunction 'that' after it? Is 'that' a mistake here?

    I am looking forward to hearing from you.

    Thank you in advance.

    Have a nice weekend.

    Jiang


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeNewYork
    Quote Originally Posted by jiang
    Dear teachers,
    I came across two sentences one of which I don't understand and one of which, I think, is not correct.

    No.1. A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than would the family agriculture of the past.

    My question is: Is the sentence after 'than', that is 'than would the family agriculture of the past' an inverted sentence? If it is what's the reason for doing so?
    Yes, it is an inverted clause. The first question is why the "would" is repeated. If the sentence were written without the second "would", we would have:

    A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than the family agriculture of the past.

    The meaning would be confusing. One could not tell if the food industry if the food industry was bearing a change better than family agriculture was bearing it or whether the food industry was bearing the change better than it was bearing family agriculture. So the word "would" is needed a second time. The second question is where one puts it. It could be placed at the end of the sentence:

    A sharp change toward resource-conserving diets would be a heavy blow to some segments of our food industry, which, however, would be better able to bear it than the family agriculture of the past would.

    That would fix the problem ultimately, but the reader might still stumble when reading the part "to bear it then the family agriculture".

    So we invert the clause and move the "would" to follow than. Then it is clear. We often move the auxiliary verb in this fashion in comparisons.

    Another example:

    Mary liked the new doorman more than her boyfriend John.

    One can't tell here if Mary was comparing the doorman to her boyfriend or whether Mary's feelings were being compared to John's feelings.

    Mary liked the new doorman more than her boyfriend John did.

    The clarity is improved, but the possible stumble remains.

    Mary liked the new doorman more than did her boyfriend John.

    Clarity improved and stumbling block removed.

    This reversal is usually not necessary in short, simple comparisons, but it can be halpful in longer, more complcated ones.


    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    I have consulted my dictionaries the subjective clause is always a negative sentence or of negative meaning when we use 'let alone'. So the sentence should be 'It should......that the diet revolution will not occur, let alone.....' Am I right?
    Yes, I agree with you. The writer seemed to feel that "pessimism" was enough of a negative, but I don't agree. :wink:

  4. #4
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Philippines
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    43,290
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I'd say that the second conjunction comes from the verb 'granted' and is there to link to that verb, while 'let alone' links to the clause.

  5. #5
    jiang is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    2,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    :D
    Thank you very much for your explanationt.

    Jiang
    Quote Originally Posted by tdol
    I'd say that the second conjunction comes from the verb 'granted' and is there to link to that verb, while 'let alone' links to the clause.

  6. #6
    MikeNewYork's Avatar
    MikeNewYork is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,702
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: let alone; would

    Quote Originally Posted by jiang
    :D & :?
    Dear Mike,
    Thank you very much for your explanations. Now I understand the first question well.

    I still don't quite understand the second one:
    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    If 'let alone' is a conjunction, why is there another conjunction 'that' after it? Is 'that' a mistake here?

    I am looking forward to hearing from you.
    I agree with TDOL. The two conjunctions are serving different functions. "That" is used to introduce the noun clause; "let alone" creates the context for that noun clause. :wink:

  7. #7
    jiang is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Student or Learner
      • Native Language:
      • Chinese
      • Home Country:
      • China
      • Current Location:
      • China
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    2,671
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: let alone; would

    :)
    Thank you very much for your reply.
    Jiang
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeNewYork
    Quote Originally Posted by jiang
    :D & :?
    Dear Mike,
    Thank you very much for your explanations. Now I understand the first question well.

    I still don't quite understand the second one:
    No.2. It should be granted that there are some grounds for pessimism that the diet revolution will occur, let alone that it may leave us notably healthier and wealthier.

    If 'let alone' is a conjunction, why is there another conjunction 'that' after it? Is 'that' a mistake here?

    I am looking forward to hearing from you.
    I agree with TDOL. The two conjunctions are serving different functions. "That" is used to introduce the noun clause; "let alone" creates the context for that noun clause. :wink:

  8. #8
    MikeNewYork's Avatar
    MikeNewYork is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Academic
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    14,702
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: let alone; would

    Quote Originally Posted by jiang
    :)
    Thank you very much for your reply.
    Jiang
    No problem, Jiang. :wink:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •