a better option

[ostap77]

1)"Insofar as there is a dominant belief in our society today, it is a belief in the magic of the market place."

OR

2)"Insofar as there has been a dominant belief in our society today, it is the belief in magic of the market place."

3)"Taras Shevchenko, a Ukrainian poet, wrote the words to this song."

OR

4)"Taras Shevchenko, a Ukrainian poet, wrote the lyrics to this song."

5)"He hadn't answered the one letter she had written to him."

OR

6)"He didn't answer the only letter she had written to him."

 

[apex2000]

Insofar as there is a dominant belief in our society today, it is a belief in the magic of the market place.

Taras Shevchenko, a Ukrainian poet, wrote the lyrics to this song.
But words is acceptable.

He didn't answer the only letter she had written to him.

 

[Raymott]

He didn't answer the only letter she had written to him.

Unless, or course, the intended meaning is that of the first sentence, in which case, the first choice would be more appropriate.

 

[apex2000]

But which is the better option? There was no question about intention.

 

[ostap77]

But which is the better option? There was no question about intention.

What about 2)? Is it acceptable?

Can I say "it's the belief in the magic of the market" because I mentioned it for the second time? Can I say "in magic of the...."?

 

[SoothingDave]

What about 2)? Is it acceptable?

Can I say "it's the belief in the magic of the market" because I mentioned it for the second time? Can I say "in magic of the...."?

No, you can't say "in magic of..." You need to say "in the magic..."

Also, #2 fails because you can't say something "has been" and then "is."

If it's a "has been" then it "was the belief..." And you can't put "today" in the sentence if it's about the past.

 

[ostap77]

No, you can't say "in magic of..." You need to say "in the magic..."

Also, #2 fails because you can't say something "has been" and then "is."

If it's a "has been" then it "was the belief..." And you can't put "today" in the sentence if it's about the past.

If I left "today" out and slightly changed the meaning, would it work this way?

"Insofar as there has been a dominant belief in our society for the last 20 years, it is the belief in the magic of the market place."

Wouldn't it mean now that "it started in the past" and "has continued up to a moment in the present" and not finished yet?

 

[SoothingDave]

If I left "today" out slightly changed the meaning, would it work this way?

"Insofar as there has been a dominant belief in our society for the last 20 years, it is the belief in the magic of the market place."

Wouldn't it mean now that "it started in the past" and "has continued up to a moment in the present" and not finished yet?

Yes. That's OK.

 

[Raymott]

But which is the better option? There was no question about intention.

That was my point. You have two sentences meaning different things. Without context, there's no best option.
Which is the best option: "I am running up the stairs"; OR "I was running up the stairs"?

 

[apex2000]

The one letter, or, the only letter.
Which is best?
I prefer the second because there is that bit more emphasis.

 

[Raymott]

The one letter, or, the only letter.
Which is best?
I prefer the second because there is that bit more emphasis.

1. "We're having strawberry ice cream for dessert."
2. "We eat chocolate ice cream later for dessert."

2. is the better option because I prefer chocolate.

 

[apex2000]

1. "We're having strawberry ice cream for dessert."
2. "We eat chocolate ice cream later for dessert."

2. is the better option because I prefer chocolate.

It seems to me that you are trying to provide a connection between two products against two descriptors. Maybe I am missing something but I cannot see any relevance in comparing one/only with chocolate/strawberry.

 

[Khosro]

5)"He hadn't answered the one letter she had written to him."

OR

6)"He didn't answer the only letter she had written to him."

Does "the one letter" any other implications apart from "the only letter"? If it has then we should see what it could be.

 

[Raymott]

It seems to me that you are trying to provide a connection between two products against two descriptors. Maybe I am missing something but I cannot see any relevance in comparing one/only with chocolate/strawberry.

You might be missing something. I'll try to be as explicit and literal as possible.
If a student gives you two sentences that mean different things, and asks "Which is the better option?", the correct answer is "It depends on what you're trying to say."
Choosing one sentence over the other is like saying you prefer the sentence with chocolate in it because you prefer chocolate to strawberry. In this particular case, you've chosen "didn't answer" over "hadn't answered" without knowing the context, or the intended meaning of the sentence.
Objectively, there's no reason to say that "She didn't answer" is preferable to "She hadn't answered" without more context.

 

[ostap77]

You might be missing something. I'll try to be as explicit and literal as possible.
If a student gives you two sentences that mean different things, and asks "Which is the better option?", the correct answer is "It depends on what you're trying to say."
Choosing one sentence over the other is like saying you prefer the sentence with chocolate in it because you prefer chocolate to strawberry. In this particular case, you've chosen "didn't answer" over "hadn't answered" without knowing the context, or the intended meaning of the sentence.
Objectively, there's no reason to say that "She didn't answer" is preferable to "She hadn't answered" without more context.

What about "the one letter" and "the only letter"? Differece in meaning?

I would humbly suggest that "the one letter" means a very speacial letter. There might have been several letters but there was something in the contex of this particular one that made it so special, whereas "the only letter" implies that there was only one letter he didn't answer?

 

[Khosro]

What about "the one letter" and "the only letter"? Differece in meaning?

I would humbly suggest that "the one letter" means a very speacial letter. There might have been several letters but there was something in the contex of this particular one that made it so special, whereas "the only letter" implies that there was only one letter he didn't answer?

I think so, but I want to be sure about it.

 

[Raymott]

What about "the one letter" and "the only letter"? Differece in meaning?

I would humbly suggest that "the one letter" means a very speacial letter. There might have been several letters but there was something in the contex of this particular one that made it so special, whereas "the only letter" implies that there was only one letter he didn't answer?

Yes, they can mean different things.
If you say that one form is better if it conveys more emphasis, you'd need to explain i) why the emphatic form is preferable, ii) what makes one form more emphatic than the other.
I think it's a false premise.

 

[apex2000]

You might be missing something. I'll try to be as explicit and literal as possible.
If a student gives you two sentences that mean different things, and asks "Which is the better option?", the correct answer is "It depends on what you're trying to say."
Choosing one sentence over the other is like saying you prefer the sentence with chocolate in it because you prefer chocolate to strawberry. In this particular case, you've chosen "didn't answer" over "hadn't answered" without knowing the context, or the intended meaning of the sentence.
Objectively, there's no reason to say that "She didn't answer" is preferable to "She hadn't answered" without more context.

Yes, I should have added a comment to my first post. I provided further information in a later post but my choice was not about 'didn't answer' or 'hadn't answered' - it was about 'the one' or 'only'.