A two-edged sentence.

Question

I understand 2 meanings when I read "the event that we believe or know will not happen" : 1) I believe or know the event which will not happen, and 2) I know or believe that the event will not happen. They are similar meanings but not the same. According to the 1st meaning, "the event that we believe or know" is the subject, and according to the 2nd meaning, "the event that we believe or know will not happen" is one unit. So, I think I am right that I understand these 2 meanings, right? If I am right, how can we distunguish these 2 meanings from each other, is it by stress on some words? If I am wrong, which meaning should I understand and how can express the other meaning? Help about this issue will be appreciated, thanks.

GPY · Accepted Answer

Hmmm. I thought I answered this question before, but my reply seems to have disappeared. Interpretation (1) does not work properly because you cannot "believe an event".

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you. I understand, the meaning is clear by the word. But, what about "the horse (which) I know will gain the race"? I understand 2 meanings here: 1) I know the horse which will gain the race 2) I know that the horse will gain the race. According to the 1st meaning, "the horse (which) I know " is the subject, and according to the 2nd meaning, "the horse (which) I know will gain the race" is one unit. So, I think I am still right that I understand these 2 meanings, ain't I? If I am right, how can we distunguish these 2 meanings from each other, is it by stress on some words? If I am wrong, which meaning should I understand and how can I express the other meaning? Thanks.

GPY · Answer

For better naturalness in the respective interpretations, and hopefully without altering the substance of your question, I will change the phrase to "A horse (that) I know will win the race". Two interpretations are possible.

1. "A horse (that) I know" is the subject of "will win the race". In this case, "A horse (that) I know will win the race" is a complete statement, and can be a sentence by itself. Despite my alterations, it still seems a slightly unusual thing to say, possibly sounding as if you "know" a horse in the same way as you "know" a person. It does not mean "I know which horse will win the race".

2. In the second interpretation, the whole of "(that) I know will win the race" is a relative clause modifying "horse". In this case, "A horse (that) I know will win the race" is a noun phrase; it is not a complete statement, and cannot be a sentence by itself. To make it complete, something else must be added, e.g. "I bet on a horse that I know will win the race".

"know" is normally stressed more strongly in the second interpretation. However, the two interpretations are more fundamentally distinguished by whether is "A horse (that) I know will win the race" is presented as a complete statement or is used as a noun phrase within a larger statement.

Anonymous · Answer

It's clearer and I see now. Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation.

A two-edged sentence.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions