need clarification...pls help!

[beeja]

Pls help explain the following sentence.

"You relinguish your claim for “fairness” or “justice” in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer."

Thanks!

 

[Red5]

Hmmmm, what a sentence!

 

[MikeNewYork]

Pls help explain the following sentence.

"You relinguish your claim for “fairness” or “justice” in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer."

Thanks!

The individual words make sense, but the combined meaning is a bit obscure.

The only context I can think of for this sentence would be advice to a woman who is about to marry a brutal dictator. :wink:

 

[henry]

Pls help explain the following sentence.

"You relinguish your claim for “fairness” or “justice” in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer."

Thanks!

The individual words make sense, but the combined meaning is a bit obscure.

The only context I can think of for this sentence would be advice to a woman who is about to marry a brutal dictator. :wink:

I agree with your sentence. But I think it's a bit difficult to understand.

Here is my simple sentence:
She gives up all her long-held moral and values to benefit herself from her new intimate relationship with a monster.

What do you think?
:wink:

 

[Tdol]

Beauty and the beast? ;-)

 

[MikeNewYork]

Pls help explain the following sentence.

"You relinguish your claim for “fairness” or “justice” in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer."

Thanks!

The individual words make sense, but the combined meaning is a bit obscure.

The only context I can think of for this sentence would be advice to a woman who is about to marry a brutal dictator. :wink:

I agree with your sentence. But I think it's a bit difficult to understand.

Here is my simple sentence:
She gives up all her long-held moral and values to benefit herself from her new intimate relationship with a monster.

What do you think?
:wink:

That's pretty good. "Moral" is countable, just like "value", so it should be pluralized. "Morality" would be uncountable. :wink:

 

[beeja]

Well, let me explain more. The scenario is...

A man found out that his wife has an affair. He thought it's her fault. Anyway, the woman explained she had done that 'coz the man never pays attention to her.

Now the way to solve the problem in a win-win way, I guess...

A couple worked out and came up with new distinctions:

1) Love is neither about self-determination nor sacrifice. It's a context in which two people build the life they want together.

2) Strength and independence are qualities that can enhance a relationship.

Then come to the sentence that I'm so confused, so I quoted you guys the whole paragraph.

In this case, you are not concerned that the other person examine her own assumptions. You see that the "stumbling blocks" that stand in your way are part of you, not her, and only you can remove them. Moreover, once you embark on the practice (of being positive), you may find yourself relinguishing your claim for "faireness" or "justice" in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer.

You know, like two "100%" make a whole!

So, anyone can give me clearer explanation about the bold sentence???

:wink:

 

[Casiopea]

Well, let me explain more. The scenario is...

A man found out that his wife has an affair. He thought it's her fault. Anyway, the woman explained she had done that 'coz the man never pays attention to her.

Now the way to solve the problem in a win-win way, I guess...

A couple worked out and came up with new distinctions:

1) Love is neither about self-determination nor sacrifice. It's a context in which two people build the life they want together.

2) Strength and independence are qualities that can enhance a relationship.

Then come to the sentence that I'm so confused, so I quoted you guys the whole paragraph.

In this case, you are not concerned that the other person examine her own assumptions. You see that the "stumbling blocks" that stand in your way are part of you, not her, and only you can remove them. Moreover, once you embark on the practice (of being positive), you may find yourself relinguishing your claim for "faireness" or "justice" in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer.

You know, like two "100%" make a whole!

So, anyone can give me clearer explanation about the bold sentence???

:wink:

Cotext is always nice. :wink:

Put aside who is right and who is wrong (Justice), who needs to be forgiven and who needs to forgive (Fairness). A loving and caring relationship is the ultimate solution.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Well, let me explain more. The scenario is...

A man found out that his wife has an affair. He thought it's her fault. Anyway, the woman explained she had done that 'coz the man never pays attention to her.

Now the way to solve the problem in a win-win way, I guess...

A couple worked out and came up with new distinctions:

1) Love is neither about self-determination nor sacrifice. It's a context in which two people build the life they want together.

2) Strength and independence are qualities that can enhance a relationship.

Then come to the sentence that I'm so confused, so I quoted you guys the whole paragraph.

In this case, you are not concerned that the other person examine her own assumptions. You see that the "stumbling blocks" that stand in your way are part of you, not her, and only you can remove them. Moreover, once you embark on the practice (of being positive), you may find yourself relinguishing your claim for "faireness" or "justice" in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer.

You know, like two "100%" make a whole!

So, anyone can give me clearer explanation about the bold sentence???



:wink:

That makes a big difference. IMO, the meaning now turns on the word "claim". I believe that the writer is talking about "ownership", and telling the couple that two people shouldn't stay together because it is fair, right, or just. That is like putting a claim on the other person's affections. It is as if each person "owes" the other person. The writer is telling them that if they put down their claims, the ownership, they can enjoy the real benefits of a voluntary, intimate relationship.

 

[RonBee]

Well, let me explain more. The scenario is...

A man found out that his wife has an affair. He thought it's her fault. Anyway, the woman explained she had done that 'coz the man never pays attention to her.

Now the way to solve the problem in a win-win way, I guess...

A couple worked out and came up with new distinctions:

1) Love is neither about self-determination nor sacrifice. It's a context in which two people build the life they want together.

2) Strength and independence are qualities that can enhance a relationship.

Then come to the sentence that I'm so confused, so I quoted you guys the whole paragraph.

In this case, you are not concerned that the other person examine her own assumptions. You see that the "stumbling blocks" that stand in your way are part of you, not her, and only you can remove them. Moreover, once you embark on the practice (of being positive), you may find yourself relinguishing your claim for "faireness" or "justice" in favor of the riches that an intimate relationship can offer.

You know, like two "100%" make a whole!

So, anyone can give me clearer explanation about the bold sentence???

:wink:

Allow me to suggest some corrections. If the affair is over, say: "A man found out that his wife had an affair." If the affair is still going on (at the time), say: "A man found out that his wife was having an affair."

For the second sentence, say: "He thought it was her fault." Or, if you want to put it in present tense, say: "He thinks it is her fault."

Re:

• Anyway, the woman explained she had done that 'coz the man never pays attention to her.

Say:

• Anyway, the woman explained she did it because the man never paid attention to her.

Or:

• Anyway, the woman explained her reason for doing it was that the man never paid attention to her.

Or:

• Anyway, the woman explained her reason for doing it was that the man never pays attention to her.

Re:

• A couple worked out and came up with new distinctions:

Perhaps:

• The couple thought things over and came up with some new ideas.

(The expression is worked it out.)

Isn't 2-times-100% 200%? (Perhaps you were thinking of "two halves make a whole"?

:wink: