Mr Johnson’s opponents note that his support was weaker than that accorded Theresa May

[kadioguy]

The world this week
Politics

Battling the fallout from parties held at Downing Street during covid-19 lockdowns, Boris Johnson, Britain’s prime minister, won a snap no-confidence vote among Conservative mps. But more than 40% of his own mps voted against him, severely denting his authority. The party’s rules prevent another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership for a year. But Mr Johnson’s opponents note that his support was weaker than that accorded Theresa May in a similar vote in 2018, as her premiership floundered. Six months later, she quit.

https://www.economist.com/the-world-this-week/2022/06/09/politics
----
1. Why not "The party’s rules have prevented another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership for a year"?

Isn't the pattern "the present perfect + for (a period of time)"?

Or does it mean "The party’s rules prevent another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership in/within a year"?

2. "Mr Johnson’s opponents note ..."
Why is "note" in the present simple? How about "noted"?

3. Why not "... his support was weaker than that accorded to Theresa May in a similar vote ..."? I think that "accord" here means "give", thus "accorded to someone" (given to someone).

Or perhaps:
(a) Conservative mps accorded Theresa May support.
↓
(b) The support was accorded Theresa May (by conservative mps).
↓
(c) ... than that (= support) (which was) accorded Theresa May in a similar vote in 2018 ...

[Edit: Added "Or perhaps" part for question 3.]
[Edit: Fixed a typo.]

 

[emsr2d2]

The world this week
Politics

Battling the fallout from parties held at Downing Street during covid-19 lockdowns, Boris Johnson, Britain’s prime minister, won a snap no-confidence vote among Conservative mps. But more than 40% of his own mps voted against him, severely denting his authority. The party’s rules prevent another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership for a year. But Mr Johnson’s opponents note that his support was weaker than that accorded Theresa May in a similar vote in 2018, as her premiership floundered. Six months later, she quit.

https://www.economist.com/the-world-this-week/2022/06/09/politics
----
1. Why not "The party’s rules have prevented another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership for a year"?

Isn't the pattern "the present perfect + for (a period of time)"?

Or does it mean "The party’s rules prevent another formal challenge to Mr Johnson’s leadership in/within a year"?

2. "Mr Johnson’s opponents note ..."
Why is "note" in the present simple? How about "noted"?

3. Why not "... his support was weaker than that accorded to Theresa May in a similar vote ..."? I think that "accord" here means "give", thus "accorded to someone" (given to someone).

1. It refers to the current rules. As the rules stand now, no one can challenge him for another twelve months.
2. The present tense is commonly used in reporting.
3. I think that's a typo and should be "afforded".

 

[kadioguy]

1. It refers to the current rules. As the rules stand now, no one can challenge him for another twelve months.

Now I know that "for + a period of time" doesn't necessarily go with the present perfect. It can be with the present simple as in the original.

2. The present tense is commonly used in reporting.

To give the reader a feeling of it (Mr Johnson’s opponents' noting) being current at the time of publishing. Is that right?

3. I think that's a typo and should be "afforded".

Please see my "Or perhaps" part. Do you think that it makes sense?

[Edit: Fixed a typo.]

 

[emsr2d2]

I'm not sure what difference it makes. (Note the correct spelling of "perhaps". You wrote "perhpas" three times!)

 

[kadioguy]

I'm not sure what difference it makes. (Note the correct spelling of "perhaps". You wrote "perhpas" three times!)

I mean the pattern is this:

1. [A] accorded [C] support.

2. The support was accorded [C] (by [A]).

3. ... than the support (which was) accorded [C] in a similar vote in 2018 ...

[A] = Conservative mps
[C] = Theresa May

 

[5jj]

3. I think that's a typo and should be "afforded".

I think 'accorded' is what was intended. It makes good sense.

 

[emsr2d2]

I think 'accorded' is what was intended. It makes good sense.

I re-read it and I now agree. Sorry for the confusion.