Jump to content
Chinese-forums.com
Learn Chinese in China

Kenny同志

Is this sentence grammatical?

Recommended Posts

Kenny同志
"From the investor community, the energy funds I am speaking to, not alternative energy funds but funds who have had complete '360s' on this and were pro-nuclear, they have gone anti-nuclear."

from: http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8392636/Japan-crisis-forces-rethink-of-the-nuclear-option.html&sa=U&ei=FOCKTYeYKYGKuAOnzazBDg&ved=0CA4QFjAB&usg=AFQjCNFh14vnGen8brOvldy3VOVsYGWrUA

Is it grammatical? I am totally at a loss as to what it is saying.

I will be more than grateful if you could rewrite it for me.

Thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Site Sponsors:
Pleco for iPhone / Android iPhone & Android Chinese dictionary: camera & hand- writing input, flashcards, audio.
Study Chinese in Kunming 1-1 classes, qualified teachers and unique teaching methods in the Spring City.
Learn Chinese Characters Learn 2289 Chinese Characters in 90 Days with a Unique Flash Card System.
Hacking Chinese Tips and strategies for how to learn Chinese more efficiently
Popup Chinese Translator Understand Chinese inside any Windows application, website or PDF.
Chinese Grammar Wiki All Chinese grammar, organised by level, all in one place.

daofeishi

Try this:

I have been talking to investor funds from the investor community. These are not alternative energy funds, but funds that have had complete 360s (changed their opinion completely) on nuclear power and were pro-nuclear. These funds have (now) gone anti-nuclear.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
creamyhorror
"From the investor community, the energy funds I am speaking to, not alternative energy funds but funds who have had complete '360s' on this and were pro-nuclear, they have gone anti-nuclear."

It's not quite grammatical, because some words were left out, but it's a common sort of "error" in speech. The sentence is pretty badly constructed, but that's the nature of off-the-cuff speech.

The basic structure is:

"From the investor community, (I have heard that) they have gone anti-nuclear."

1. "the energy funds I am speaking to, not alternative energy funds but funds who have had complete '360s' on this and were pro-nuclear" is a clarification/qualification of the noun "investor community".

2. To clarify the previous quote, I've inserted parentheses to show words that were left out: "the energy funds I am speaking to, (which are) not alternative energy funds but (are) funds who {have had complete '360s' on this and were pro-nuclear}"

3a. "not alternative energy funds but funds who have had complete '360s' on this and were pro-nuclear": this segment is a parenthetical insertion, used to clarify/qualify the noun phrase "energy funds I am speaking to".

3b. Doing a "complete 360" is a misused phrase here; it should be doing a "complete 180", since turning 360 degrees leaves you at your original orientation (which in this case is pro-nuclear). But the funds have turned anti-nuclear.

3c. It's also tautological to qualify these funds with the description "have had complete 360s on this", since the point of the basic structure is to say that pro-nuclear funds have gone anti-nuclear. He/she is literally saying that pro-nuclear funds that have reversed their stance on nuclear power have gone anti-nuclear, which is a tautology.

4. In summary, the basic meaning (tautology removed) is "I have heard from pro-nuclear energy funds that they have gone anti-nuclear."

Hope that wasn't too confusing! Sorry if I covered anything you already were aware of.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenny同志

Thank you Feishi for your rewrite and thank you Creamyhorror for your very detailed explanation.

The posts are very helpful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jbradfor
complete '360s'

I've never understood that construction. If you do a 360, aren't you facing where you started? Shouldn't that be a 180?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gharial

What concept would best describe this then? Excessive apposition? Unmarked parenthesis? Irradiated brains? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aristotle1990

[delete me]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
daofeishi
What concept would best describe this then?

Excessive angular momentum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and select your username and password later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Click here to reply. Select text to quote.

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...