[Vocabulary] "the express reason", What does it mean?

[Tdol]

Given that the person is talking aboout the beginnings oof things as old as religion and family life, I imagine the systematic labour that began with slavery could well be way back too- more slaves or indentured labourers building the pyramids instead of being hunter gatherers, etc, than working in factories.

 

[pinbong]

Given that the person is talking aboout the beginnings oof things as old as religion and family life, I imagine the systematic labour that began with slavery could well be way back too- more slaves or indentured labourers building the pyramids instead of being hunter gatherers, etc, than working in factories.

Thanks, Mr. Tdol.:up:

 

[BobK]

I sympathise, pinbong.

All I was suggesting was that it is not really worth bothering now with trying to discover what the writer meant or could have said.

:up: Agreed. But I'll have a think and try post something more helpful later - probably not today though.

b

 

[pinbong]

Many thanks, Mr. BobK.

I think sometimes people think faster than they write. When Mr. Dewey was writing that "systematic labor... because of enslavement to others", he had something definite going on in his mind but it did not turn out very well. That's it. Being a native speaker he might not have even noticed anything wrong. But to non-native speakers it's conspicuous. Because we tend to focus more on grammer and syntax, rather than content.

And I'v realised however hard I learn English, there's bound to be 30% of English materials I can never understand. Because that's how much our languages do not overlap.

Looking forward to your explanation. Thanks.

 

[BobK]

Here's my understanding of the underlined sentence. It's not short, because I had to 'unpack' lots of hard words and the sort of abstraction typical of some academic writing. I don't think the people who set the test intentionally made it difficult; they just chose a bit of academic text without being aware of the sort of problems learners from another culture might face.

There were two desires behind the setting up of religious associations [broadly, churches. These were ‘the express reasons’ – what people said they wanted):
• Securing the favour of overruling powers [that is, ‘the gods’ or ‘God’ or something like that , not political powers].
• Keeping evil influences away

The express reason for the organizing of family life [rather than, say, living in communes] lay in two desires:
• The gratification of appetites [sex, safety, food and so on]
• The securing of a family line that extended through several generations

The express reason for the setting up of an economic, political, and social system that depended on everyone having a job [I think this is what he means; I’d’ve said ‘system-wide’ rather than ‘systematic’ – the point is that until the advent of what the writer calls ‘systematic labor’ most people had ‘a liege-lord’ (someone they existed to please), and these aristocrats did nothing productive unless it suited them] was based on several needs [but the writer is a bit unsure of his ground here, because he qualifies the needs as ‘for the most part’]:
• The fact that people were already working unpaid for a master [I don’t think the writer is talking about slaves as we know them]
• …

b

 

[pinbong]

Here's my understanding of the underlined sentence.
...
The express reason for the setting up of an economic, political, and social system that depended on everyone having a job [I think this is what he means; I’d’ve said ‘system-wide’ rather than ‘systematic’ – the point is that until the advent of what the writer calls ‘systematic labor’ most people had ‘a liege-lord’ (someone they existed to please), and these aristocrats did nothing productive unless it suited them] was based on several needs [but the writer is a bit unsure of his ground here, because he qualifies the needs as ‘for the most part’]:
• The fact that people were already working unpaid for a master [I don’t think the writer is talking about slaves as we know them]



b

Sincere thanks, Mr. BobK. You made the three points very clear. But I'm still sort of confused about the third. Since it's midnight here I'm saving it and will think over the last point tomorrow. Anyways, it's been agreed on by you ESL teachers that it's not well-written. So I don't worry as much as I did. Just have to keep my fingers crossed the exams I'm going to take in a few days won't be this hard.:shock:

 

[BobK]

:up: Something that may assist you in your interpretation of that bit, the word 'slave' and its derivatives (such as 'enslavement') is often used metaphorically - not referring directly to someone who is forced to do unpaid work. For example, people get wages (so they're not slaves) but they have to use those wages to pay for things made by other earners of wages. The employees can all be referred to as 'wage-slaves'.

b