as

[navi tasan]

Is this sentence grammatically correct:

1-"If it be true that myths have no cosmological value, then their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."
(One may substitute "scientific value" for "cosmological value" and "unscientific human experience" for "precritical human experience" in order to make the sentence easier to understand.)

My problem is that to me it seems that "as a record of precritical human experience" can only refer to "myths", but the word "myths" is not mentioned in the main clause, thus, although the sentence is comprehensible, we practically have:

2-" Their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

Can 2 be considered as correct with "as a record of precritical experience" not refering to any word in the sentence?

How about:
3-"The so-called "anthropological value" of myths is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

 

[RonBee]

Is this sentence grammatically correct:

1-"If it be true that myths have no cosmological value, then their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."
(One may substitute "scientific value" for "cosmological value" and "unscientific human experience" for "precritical human experience" in order to make the sentence easier to understand.)

My problem is that to me it seems that "as a record of precritical human experience" can only refer to "myths", but the word "myths" is not mentioned in the main clause, thus, although the sentence is comprehensible, we practically have:

2-" Their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

Can 2 be considered as correct with "as a record of precritical experience" not refering to any word in the sentence?

How about:
3-"The so-called "anthropological value" of myths is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

<<2-" Their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

Can 2 be considered as correct with "as a record of precritical experience" not refering to any word in the sentence?>>

It seems to me that "as a record of precritical experience" refers to "anthropological value".

<<How about:
3-"The so-called "anthropological value" of myths is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience.">>

That's fine.

 

[navi tasan]

Thanks for your reply, RonBee.


If I understand you correctly, in sentence #2, "as records of precritical human experience" cannot refer to the word "myths" and will therefore refer to "anthropological value", but in sentence #3 it can refer to "myths" since the word "myths" is mentioned in the sentence.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Is this sentence grammatically correct:

1-"If it be true that myths have no cosmological value, then their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."
(One may substitute "scientific value" for "cosmological value" and "unscientific human experience" for "precritical human experience" in order to make the sentence easier to understand.)

My problem is that to me it seems that "as a record of precritical human experience" can only refer to "myths", but the word "myths" is not mentioned in the main clause, thus, although the sentence is comprehensible, we practically have:

2-" Their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

Can 2 be considered as correct with "as a record of precritical experience" not refering to any word in the sentence?

How about:
3-"The so-called "anthropological value" of myths is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

The sentence is grammatically correct. First, let me say that you have demonstrated a very high level of English proficiency by being able to understand this sentence. The word "their" refers to myths. However, the noun "value" becomes the new referent for "as a record of precritical human experience". Certainly, that phrase can apply to "myths" with no problem. The question is whether the phrase can apply to "value". I would say that it can. The word "as" is very important. It leaves us with "myths have value as a record...". I would say that the statement is logical.

 

[RonBee]

Complex sentence ;-)

To navi tasan: I was dilatory in my response to your second posting, but because I was so I can say that I agree with everything MNY said.

Perhaps this will help.

The sentence:
-"If it be true that myths have no cosmological value, then their so-called "anthropological value" is of no significance other than as a record of precritical human experience."

their so-called "anthropological value"--> a record of precritical human experience

their-->myths

(In the phrase above, their refers to myths.
-------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps a look at a simpler sentence will prove helpful, thus:

His values are phony.

values-->phony

It does not say "he is phony", although one could fairly deduce that.

If I have made any errors someone will be sure to tell me. ;-)

 

[navi tasan]

s

Thank you for your replies and for your kind remarks, but you might have overestimated me, Mike.

As for the sentence, I think we agree that "their " refers to myths. No problem there.

It seems to me that we are also agreed that "as records..." refers to "anthropological value". My problem is that I don't think that is what the writer meant!
A "record" cannot be an "anthropological value". Myths have anthropological value as records of precritical human experience. Myths are records of precritical human experience and therefore have anthropological value. I think that is what the writer meant, but that is not what he says.

I'll take another example which is "home-made" and which, I hope, will clarify things for me. What do you think about this sentence:

A-"The utterences of the king are of no significance other than as the representative of the gods on earth."

Is this sentence correct? Can "as the representative of the gods on earth" refer to "the king" here?

 

[MikeNewYork]

Re: s

Thank you for your replies and for your kind remarks, but you might have overestimated me, Mike.

As for the sentence, I think we agree that "their " refers to myths. No problem there.

It seems to me that we are also agreed that "as records..." refers to "anthropological value". My problem is that I don't think that is what the writer meant!
A "record" cannot be an "anthropological value". Myths have anthropological value as records of precritical human experience. Myths are records of precritical human experience and therefore have anthropological value. I think that is what the writer meant, but that is not what he says.

I'll take another example which is "home-made" and which, I hope, will clarify things for me. What do you think about this sentence:

A-"The utterences of the king are of no significance other than as the representative of the gods on earth."

Is this sentence correct? Can "as the representative of the gods on earth" refer to "the king" here?

<<<A "record" cannot be an "anthropological value". >>>

The sentence doesn't really say that. It says that myths have value as records of.... That is similar to saying that cars have value as transportation.

<<<A-"The utterences of the king are of no significance other than as the representative of the gods on earth."

Is this sentence correct? Can "as the representative of the gods on earth" refer to "the king" here?>>>

This one doesn't work. You have "utterances as the representative". A representative is a person, possibly the king.

 

[navi tasan]

I think I've got it.
Thanks Mike.

 

[MikeNewYork]

I think I've got it.
Thanks Mike.

You're welcome