"Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

[GoodTaste]

"Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

What is the difference between "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" and "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"?

It seems to me that the former's tone sounds a bit more mild than the latter, all the while they share the same meaning. I am not sure.

==================
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s undermining of science during the COVID-19 pandemic has made its effects worse for the country, researchers say.

Source: Nature
‘We are being ignored’: Brazil’s researchers blame anti-science government for devastating COVID surge

 

[jutfrank]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

I believe there is some slight difference in meaning, which is hard to explain. I'd say that the use of the preposition creates a definiteness that the version without of lacks. It helps specify the kind of undermining that is being referred to.

 

[Glizdka]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

Don't read it. It's all balderdash.

[STRIKE]Not a teacher
------

The obvious difference is the function of each word.

---

"Bolsonaro's undermining science."
Bolsonaro's → contraction of Bolsonaro is
undermining → present participle verb

This is a sentence. The main verb, undermine, is in the present continuous.
Bolsonaro is actively undermining science through his actions.

---

"Bolsonaro's undermining of science."
Bolsonaro's → possessive
undermining → gerund

This isn't a sentence. If I'm correct, the whole thing functions as a noun phrase.
The undermining is caused by Bolsonaro and it affects science.

You could use it as a subject of a complete sentence.
Paraphrasing the linked article's headline, "Bolsonaro's undermining of science has made researchers feel they are being ignored."

---

The two have different grammatical functions. It's not really sensible to try to compare their meanings.[/STRIKE]

 

[5jj]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

In the sentence "Bolsonaro's undermining science has made researchers feel they are being ignored", Bolsanaro's is not a contraction of Bolsanaro is.

 

[tzfujimino]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

If it were "The fact that Bolsonaro's undermining science has made researchers feel they are being ignored", Bolsanaro's would be a contraction of Bolsanaro is.

 

[Glizdka]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

In the sentence "Bolsonaro's undermining science has made researchers feel they are being ignored", Bolsanaro's is not a contraction of Bolsanaro is.

Ha! When isolated, "Bolsanaro's undermining science" sounded like the present continuous to me. I didn't even consider that it's a possessive + a gerund just like how it is in "Bolsanaro's undermining of science".

Now that you've used my own sentence to show it, it's painfully obvious to me that it's possible for Bolsanaro's in "Bolsanaro's underming science" not to be a contraction of Bolsanaro is.

I retract from everything I've said in post #3.

 

[GoesStation]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

I retract [STRIKE]from[/STRIKE] everything I've said in post #3.

See above.

 

[probus]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

Retraction just in time, Glizdka. I was about to delete your Bolsonaro post as a statement of political opinion.

 

[jutfrank]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

Retraction just in time, Glizdka. I was about to delete your Bolsonaro post as a statement of political opinion.

I can't tell if you're joking, probus. Glizdka's post included no political opining whatsoever.

 

[GoodTaste]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

I never thought it was a contraction there until you guys mentioned the possibility. Stick to Jutfrank's answer, which leads us in depth into true English that is hard to describe.

I believe there is some slight difference in meaning, which is hard to explain. I'd say that the use of the preposition creates a definiteness that the version without of lacks. It helps specify the kind of undermining that is being referred to.

 

[Tdol]

Re: "Bolsonaro’s undermining of science" vs. "Bolsonaro’s undermining science"

I can't tell if you're joking, probus. Glizdka's post included no political opining whatsoever.

It looks like language analysis to me.