Grammar Help

[rajan]

Dear all

In the below mentioned underlined sentence, would you please tell me the meaning of first line of defence and the meaning of what could end up . What type of clauses are these. What is the function of what here in - what could end up.

Thanks
Rajan

As the first line of defence against female foeticide, sex determination tests on pregnant women have been illegal in India for years. But in what could end up as a major policy shift, the Planning Commission is proposing relaxing the ban for rural areas as part of programme of "adopting" female foetuses and generously incentivising families and health workers to ensure the safe delivery of girl babies.

 

[5jj]

rajan, please give more helpful titles. This thread is more about the 'meaning of" first line of defence"?' or 'function of what?'

'What' can function as a combined noun and relative pronoun. In your sentence, it is both the object of the preposition 'in' and the subject of the clause "what could end up as a major policy shift".

 

[rajan]

Re: Grammar Help - Meaning of First line of defence

would you please tell me the meaning of first line of defence.

Still could not understand the meaning of "what could end up"

Thanks

'What' can function as a combined noun and relative pronoun. In your sentence, it is both the object of the preposition 'in' and the subject of the clause "what could end up as a major policy shift".

 

[5jj]

As an initial preventative measure against female foeticide, sex ..... . But, in doing something that could result in a major shift, ...

 

[rajan]

Thanks Sir

rajan, please give more helpful titles. This thread is more about the 'meaning of" first line of defence"?' or 'function of what?'

'What' can function as a combined noun and relative pronoun. In your sentence, it is both the object of the preposition 'in' and the subject of the clause "what could end up as a major policy shift".

 

[5jj]

You are welcome.

I have suggested before, more than once, that you do not

posts unless your need the quote in your post. Excessive quoting leads to unnecessary scrolling down.

 

[rajan]

i thought you were particularly talking about lengthy posts. Anyway whatever your suggestions are will be respectully implemented.

You are welcome.

I have suggested before, more than once, that you do not

posts unless your need the quote in your post. Excessive quoting leads to unnecessary scrolling down.

 

[5jj]

And I was assuming common sense.

 

[rajan]

And I was assuming common sense.

 

[TheParser]

What type of clauses are these.


NOT A TEACHER


(1) As usual, you have asked an excellent question.

(2) As usual, Teacher Fivejedjon has given us an excellent answer.

(3) May I just add some comments that may interest you?

(4) As the first line against this practice, these tests have been illegal for years.

(a) I do not believe that the words in bold qualify as a "clause."

(b) As you know, a clause must contain a verb. There is no verb there.

(c) I believe that grammar books prefer to call those words an appositive.

(d) An appositive, as you know, is a word or some words that rename a person or

thing: Mr. Fivejedjon, the teacher, taught English in China. (We call "the teacher" an

appositive because it renames Mr. Fivejedjon.)

(e) Sometimes an appositive is more complicated. Here is one from Professor

Curme's book:

As a first step, I secured my vast property.

The main idea is that "I secured my vast property." We then say that "As a first step"

is in apposition with "I secured my vast property" because "first step" renames

"securing my property." For example, you could use two sentences: I took the first

step. That first step was to secure my property. (But it is more elegant to write it as

an appositive, don't you think?)

(f) If we wanted to, we could write two sentences: There is a first line of defense. This

first line of defense is the fact that these tests have been illegal for years. (But the

sentence with the appositive is more elegant, don't you think?)

 

[rajan]

Dear Parser,

I agree with your above explanation . :-D You have given a good piece of knowledge.

Can we replace "As the first line against this practice" with "As a first step against this practice". Are both synonymous.

Thanks
Rajan

 

[TheParser]

Can we replace "As the first line against this practice" with "As a first step against this practice". Are both synonymous.

NOT A TEACHER


(1) Excellent question.

(2) I am always afraid to say YES or NO, for we non-teachers have been warned

to be careful about giving wrong advice.

(3) Maybe (maybe!) there is a slight difference. When you say "first line of defense," it

seems (to me!) that it is defensive. It's like a war. The enemy is trying to invade us.

The first line of defense is 20 tanks. But if the enemy breaks through, then we have

to depend on the second line of defense (30 forts). Then our third line of defense is ....

(4) But "first step against X" seems to have a different flavor. Let's say that there is

a terrible disease. The government does not know what to do. Well, maybe the

"first step against X" is to tell everyone to drink boiled water. Then as the disease

spreads, the next step might be to close all schools for three months.

(5) My examples are terrible, but do you get the idea? To be frank (very honest),

I think (only my opinion) that the sentence in your first post should have used

"first step." That is, the first step is to make the practice illegal. Then if it continues,

the second step is to increase prison time for people who continue to do it. Then the

third step would be ....

 

[TheParser]

But in what could end up as a major policy shift, the Planning Commission is proposing relaxing the ban for rural areas as part of programme of "adopting" female foetuses and generously incentivising families and health workers to ensure the safe delivery of girl babies.

NOT A TEACHER


(1) I have been thinking about your second sentence all day. I do not claim that my comments are correct. I only wish to share some thoughts with you.

(2) For the sake of analysis, we can ignore the word "but."

(3) So the sentence is "In what could end up as a major policy shift, the Planning Commission is proposing relaxing the ban ... safe delivery of girl babies."

(4) As Teacher Fivejedjon told us, the clause "what could end up as a major policy shift" is the object of the preposition "in." As you know, the object of a preposition is always a noun (or pronoun). So I think that we can safely say that "what could end up as a major policy shift" is a noun clause.

(5) But I was more interested in this question: What role (job) does that prepositional phrase ("in what could end up as a major policy shift") play in your sentence?

(6) I think (repeat: think) that I may have an answer. I think (repeat: think) that it is a
so-called parenthetical element.

(7) Look at this sentence: The train was late, and, what was worse, we lost all our luggage. The words "what was worse" is an extra comment. It is not really part of the sentence. If we delete it, the sentence still makes sense: The train was late, and we lost all our luggage. That extra comment is called a parenthetical element. (I wish to credit Professor Quirk for part of that sentence.)


(8) Now look at your sentence. If we delete "in what what could end up as a major policy shift," we get:

As a first line of defense against the practice, these tests have been illegal for years, but the Planning Commission is proposing relaxing the ban ... girl babies.

(a) As you can see, the words "in what could end up as a major policy shift" is a comment (the opinion) of the writer. It is not necessary to the meaning of the sentence. Thus, I believe that we can call it a parenthetical element.

(i) Further "proof" that it is parenthetical (not really necessary) is that you can move it to different locations:

...but the Planning Commission is proposing, in what could end up as a major policy shift, relaxing the ban ... girl babies.

or even

...but the Planning Commission is proposing relaxing the ban ... girl babies, in what could end up as a major policy shift.

(Of course, putting it at the front of the sentence seems to be the best place for a smooth and clear reading.)

 

[rajan]

Dear TheParser,

Our teacher, fivejedjon post as well as your posts helped me to understand this sentence. This understanding enabled me to ask further one more question on this sentence.

When our teacher told its meaning was But, in doing something that could result in a major shift...... , a question came in mind. How did he add the word “doing”. I tried to analyze like this.

As “in” is a preposition, it can take gerund also. I have read whether a particular phrase is a gerund or not, it can be tested by replacing it with “doing this”. On the same line, I thought on the answer I got from the teacher. Eg. Fishing is a good fun ~ Doing this is a good fun.

likewise

in what could end up as a major policy shift - In doing something that could result in …..

Am I right?

Thanks

 

[TheParser]

As “in” is a preposition, it can take gerund also. I have read whether a particular phrase is a gerund or not, it can be tested by replacing it with “doing this”. On the same line, I thought on the answer I got from the teacher. Eg. Fishing is a good fun ~ Doing this is a good fun.



in what could end up as a major policy shift - In doing something that could result in …..



NOT A TEACHER


(1) I am not sure that I completely understand your question, but I am delighted to

share a few ideas until a teacher answers you.

(2) Re: "In what could end up as a major policy shift," I believe that some books

explain that -- in grammatical terms -- it = In that (which could end up as a major

policy shift). So -- only in grammatical terms -- the object of the preposition is really

the word "that."

(3) I, of course, do not know what Teacher Fivejedjon was thinking, but I believe that

he wanted to paraphrase (say something in another way), so he explained that "in what could end up as a major policy shift" means "in doing something that could result in a major policy shift."

(4) I believe that you are 100% correct: since a gerund is a noun, you may, indeed,

use it after a preposition. As you said, the "proof" that a gerund is a noun is the fact

that you can use it as a subject, as in your excellent examples: Fishing is good fun; Doing this is good fun. It can also be the object of a verb (I love fishing) or the object of a preposition (He earns his living by fishing). And, of course, "In doing that, the president of country X has shown that he truly loves his country."

 

[rajan]

Actully I was analysing how can one know that we have to use the word doing in that sentence. As the teacher told what can function as a combined noun + prounn. But how one can know that we have to use the word doing in that. I was analysing it (use of word doing) by giving the example of Gerund.

 

[5jj]

Actully I was analysing how can one know that we have to use the word doing in that sentence. .

TheParser has alreadt suggested the answer:

"When we put a verb after a preposition, we normally use an -ing form (gerund)..."

[FONT=&quot]Swan, Michael (1980) Practical English Usage (3rd ed, 2005), Oxford: OUP - page 269
[/FONT]

 

[rajan]

That was OK. I know after prepostion noun/gerund comes. How did you guess that verb "do" is to be added. I suppose we have to guess which verb suits best to complete the meaning. Is it so?

TheParser has alreadt suggested the answer:

"When we put a verb after a preposition, we normally use an -ing form (gerund)..."

[FONT=&quot]Swan, Michael (1980) Practical English Usage (3rd ed, 2005), Oxford: OUP - page 269
[/FONT]