Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Offroad's Avatar
    Offroad is offline Key Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • Brazilian Portuguese
      • Home Country:
      • Brazil
      • Current Location:
      • Brazil
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,807

    Question At the expense of

    Dear teachers

    Am I right with the following interpretation?

    The reaction system under these conditions favors the formation of A at the expense of [the formation] of B.


    'at the expense' means 'instead' and is used because B is more desired or valuable than A.

    Very much appreciated.

    Offroad

  2. #2
    Route21's Avatar
    Route21 is offline Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Thailand
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    914

    Re: At the expense of

    As an NES but not a teacher, I would read it as merely meaning that it favours the production of more A than B.

    I see no implication, per se, that B is more desired or valuable than A.

    Regards
    R21

  3. #3
    Kojak Peg Guest

    Re: At the expense of

    Expense' is the same as saying expense's, as if it belongs to expense. So it doesn't make sense. You can have an expense, or expenses, but nothing belongs to expense. So you can't have expense'

    However, you are right, in this context it does means, instead of, or more correctly, at the cost of. In a different context, it could simply mean cost. "That is an expense, I could have done without."

  4. #4
    5jj's Avatar
    5jj is offline VIP Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    28,766

    Re: At the expense of

    Quote Originally Posted by Kojak Peg View Post
    Expense' is the same as saying expense's, as if it belongs to expense.
    No it isn't.
    So it doesn't make sense.
    It does make sense, as R21 has explained.

Posting Permissions

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