grab the edge

[keannu]

This is encouraging generosity toward lefties.
1.What does "grab the edge" mean? "taking dominant position"?
2.What does "for one" mean?
3.Does "didn't encourage" mean a counterfactual condition even if there is no if-clause?

is92
ex)From a lefty's perspective, consumer relief is long overdue. If you are a lefty or live with one, you know how miserable it is for lefties to try to use scissor, can openers, three-ring binders, or other basic items desinged for right-handed people...But now lefties are on the march, growing in numbers - and it won't be long before marketers stop shunning them and instead grab the edge in the lefty marketplace....The bottom line is that the rise of southpaws means not just that we'll have more lefties in school and in the workplace - but also that society is becoming more tolerant and ultimately more able to build on self-expression instead of suppressing it...I, for one, wouldn't want to live in a society that didn't encourage handedness of all types.

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

NOT A TEACHER

1. "Edge" here means an advantage. Marketers are going to take advantage of the lefty marketplace.
2.

8 I, for one, ... used to emphasize that you believe something, will do something etc and hope others will do the same : I, for one, am proud of the team’s effort.

Source: Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
3. I don't really understand the question... However, the author is trying to say, that he is all in favour of a society that encourages handedness of all types.

 

[keannu]

I couldn't find this definition in a dictionary. Where did you get it?

1. "Edge" here means an advantage. Marketers are going to take advantage of the lefty marketplace.

For the last question, counterfactuality means the opposite of the present situation. It seems to be "If the society didn't encourage handedness of all types, I , for one, wouldn't want to live in it" as it doesn't refer to the past.

ex)I, for one, wouldn't want to live in a society that didn't encourage handedness of all types.

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

Thanks a lot!. For the last question, counterfactuality means the opposite of the present situation. It seems to be "If the society didn't encourage handedness of all types, I , for one, wouldn't want to live in it" as it doesn't refer to the past.

ex)I, for one, wouldn't want to live in a society that didn't encourage handedness of all types.

Society is becoming more tolerant of left handed people, and the author is saying that he wouldn't want to live in a society that didn't encourage handedness of all types. So basically he's fine with the way things are developping.

 

[keannu]

My question was where you got the meaning of "grab the edge" and if "didn't encourage" means a hypothetical, counterfactual present condition.

 

[JMurray]

I couldn't find this definition in a dictionary. Where did you get it?
1. "Edge" here means an advantage. Marketers are going to take advantage of the lefty marketplace.


While Chicken Sandwich is offline, here's one from oxforddictionaries.com:

edge
(3) [in singular] a quality or factor which gives superiority over close rivals: his cars have the edge over his rivals'

not a teacher​

 

[keannu]

I think "advantage" is kind of different from "superiority" for "grab the edge". I try not to give answers to questions here as a non-native speaker. I think non-native speakers should be extremly careful in giving answers if they are not quite certain of the them.

 

[keannu]

Thanks a lot! But I'm still wonder about "didn't encourage"

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

My question was where you got the meaning of "grab the edge" and if "didn't encourage" means a hypothetical, counterfactual present condition.

edge - Definition from Longman English Dictionary Online

See #3.

So, to be more precise, an edge is something that gives you an advantage over others.

 

[5jj]

Thanks a lot! But I'm still wondering about "didn't encourage"

What's the problem? Chicken Sandwich explained the meaning in posts #2 and #4, and you seemed to be clear abut the meaning in post #3.

 

[5jj]

I think non-native speakers should be extremly careful in giving answers if they are not quite certain of the them.

I agree. However, that comment is not really appropriate in this thread. Chicken Sandwich made it clear that s/he is not a teacher, her/his profile shows that s/he is not a native speaker - and her/his answer was clear and accurate.

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

I'm a "he" ;-).

I usually only answer questions when I'm pretty certain that my answer will be accurate. I have answered a number of question in the past couple of weeks, and usually I'm not that far off. And if I'm wrong, a teacher corrects me. Moreover, since no one responded to this question after about 10 hours, I thought I may as well take a shot.

I'm very grateful for the opportunity that usingenglish provides, becuase from what I've read here ( https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/comments-suggestions/173411-freedom-speech.html ), other helplines are not very tolerant of non-expert advice.
I have certainly learnt a lot from answering questions and reading the responses of the experts.

 

[keannu]

Okay, now I got it. I realize that even without "if", a sentence can make a counterfactual conditional, which I rarely have seen. Maybe this is the first or second time to see such a structure, so I was wondering if it works.
I was more focused on the grammatical usage of "if"-lessness for conditionals. But now it's clear.

 

[5jj]

Moreover, since no one responded to this question after about 10 hours, I thought I may as well take a shot.

Quite.

I sometimes suggest to some members who give inaccurate answers within a few minutes of a question's appearance that they wait three or four hours to see if a teacher/native speaker/experienced member posts a good response. However, if a question has not attracted a response after several hours, then even a guess can be helpful - as long as it's made clear that it is a guess.

It's worth reminding members that some non-native speakers in this forum are better able to answer questions about English grammar than some native speakers.

 

[Rover_KE]

It's worth reminding members that some non-native speakers in this forum are better able to answer questions about English grammar than some native speakers.

. . .and also that some non-native speakers call themselves 'teachers' because they are in the position of having to instruct students who are a bit less knowledgable in English than they are themselves.

Rover

 

[keannu]

As Rover_Ke said, there's so many non-native speaker English teachers all around the world, especially in Korea. Students learn limited knowledge from them theoretically, and some such teachers are good enough to build a basis for students, but when they encounter exceptional tricky cases, they can't get them the final solution. That's why they have to depend on native speakers as they don't know natural way of saying.

If I were to teach Korean to foreigners, I could teach better than a foreigner who has learned Korean through an academic process. I think a linguistic ability can be measured not by how much you learned theoretially, but by how much you experienced it naturally.

 

[Chicken Sandwich]

If I were to teach Korean to foreigners, I could teach better than a foreigner who has learned Korean through an academic process. I think a linguistic ability can be measured not by how much you learned theoretially, but by how much you experienced it naturally.

I know plenty of native speakers who wouldn't make good teachers, because they make mistakes (native speakers also make mistakes). I also know some academics who, despite the fact that they have a good knowledge of the grammar, speak very unnatural Russian. Therefore, a good teacher has both experienced the language naturally, as you put it, but also has a firm knowlegde of the grammar and all the other formal aspects of the particular language.

 

[5jj]

If I were to teach Korean to foreigners, I could teach better than a foreigner who has learned Korean through an academic process.

Not necessarily. I know a few native speakers of English who are pretty poor teachers, and I know some non-native speakers who are very good teachers. To teach a language successfully, you have to have a good knowledge of the language, an understanding of how it works and an ability to enable learners to acquire it.