as

Question

0In addition to shrinking hours and rising food costs, gas prices are burning up his paycheck as he drives his truck to jobs spread out over hundreds of miles in Southern California.02br02br00I sense some exaggeration by the choice of conjunction,as, which makes the sentence sound as if, as he drives his truck the gas prices increase simultaneously. Do you sense it and totally accept this mild exaggeration as it's common?02br02br00Thanks in advance!0-

Clive · Accepted Answer

0Hi,02br
02br
00Sounds OK to me.02br
02br
00Clive0-

Avangi · Answer

0I see your point, but I don't think that's the intention. The price of gas may not have risen since his last paycheck, but since his job requires him to drive to many distant job sites, 01u00as he drives02u00 from one site to another, the money left over from his paycheck rapidly dwindles.0-

New2grammar · Answer

0Avangi, your interpretation makes more sense. Thanks Clive and Avangi!0-

Avangi · Answer

0N2g, I thought you knew my bad habits. I was counting on you to give me time to edit, and not cut me off at the knees. I was typing as fast as I could, but you got me.02br
02br
00I think there's an error in the sentence, but not quite the one you specified.02br
02br
00"Gas prices" is the subject of the sentence, and "as he drives etc." modifies the verb "are burning up." The introductory prepositional phrase "In addition etc." purports to modify the subject, "gas prices," and is therefore stating that shrinking hours and rising food costs are also burning up his paycheck 01b01i01u00as he drives02u02i02b00, which is certainly not the case and shouldn't be the author's intention.02br
02br
00The shrinking hours burn up his 01i01u00figurative02u02i00 paycheck, in the sense that "paycheck" is often used to mean "how much you make per week on average." Business is bad. He gets paid by the hour, and he's been working fewer and fewer hours each week. This has nothing to do with his driving expenses. Neither does the cost of food.02br
02br
00But the three factors work together to put him in a financial bind.02br
02br
00A.0-

New2grammar · Answer

0Hi Avangi, I'm sorry but I don't know when you're done replying to a post. Now, that I look back at your previous post, I realize you didn't end it with your initial and I guess that should be an indicator whether you're done or not. If so, I'll check for it next time.02br
02br
00I'm in no position to disagree with a native speaker but your new interpretation confuses me. I see the sentence as two independent clauses, first "In addition to rising food costs and shrinking hours, gas prices are burning up his paycheck", the second "as he drives ...". And I understand it as the three factors, rising food costs, shrinking hours, and gas prices are affecting him financially. The second clause is just giving an example of how one of the factors (in this case and usually the last factor mentioned, gas prices) affecting him. Is this acceptable to you?0-

Avangi · Answer

0 02br
02br
00Hi N2g, I was just kidding about the editing. Guess I'll have to learn to use the smiley faces. Please don't hesitate to disagree with me. Many ESL students have learned things I've never thought about.02br
02br
00Okay, you're right, "as he drives etc." is a clause, but I wouldn't say it's independent. IMHO it functions as an adverb, modifying the verb of the main clause, "are burning up" (as I said previously). Sorry I missed that it's a clause, but I think my point is still intact.02br
02br
00Yes, there are three independent factors effecting him financially, and the price of gas is only one of them. Unfortunately, "gas prices" is the subject of the main clause.02br
02br
00This is what the sentence is supposed to say: "Gas prices are burning up his paycheck." Okay?02br
02br
00The problem is, you have a modifying phrase preceding that, and you have a modifying clause following that. The phrase at the beginning modifies the subject, "gas prices." The clause at the end modifies the verb, "are burning up." 01b00But02b00, these two modifiers set up an impossible conflict. You can have one, or the other, but not both.02br
02br
00The prepositional phrase at the beginning adds the other two factors to the subject, "gas prices."02br
02br
00Now we have, "Three things are burning up his paycheck." No problem! That makes sense.02br
02br
00Let's back up and take the other route. Forget the cost of food and the shrinking hours. Instead, let's add on the verb modifier, "as he drives, etc." Now we have, "Gas prices are burning up his paycheck as he drives etc." No problem! That makes sense.02br
01b02br
02br
00But00, what happens when we try to add the front modifier and the back modifier at the same time?02br
02br
00Is the 01u00cost of food02u00 burning up his paycheck 01u00as he drives02u00? Heck, no!02br
02br
00Are his 01u00shrinking hours02u00 burning up his paycheck 01u00as he drives02u00? Heck, no!02br
02br
00This doesn't bother you? It sure bothers me. It makes no sense.02br
02br
00Best wishes, - A.02br
02b0-

New2grammar · Answer

0I completely understand your point but I don't think I'm capable of constructing sentences and having to run through extensive analysis like this on the fly at the same time. Thanks, I'll keep trying till the day I die~~Thanks Avangi for the wonderful analysis!02br
02br
00By the way, what's the meaning of "cut me off at my knees"? I can sort of guess but I would like to know the exact meaning so next time I know how to use it. 0-

Avangi · Answer

0You write clearly enough when you're expressing your own thoughts. I believe clear thoughts lead to clear writing. What's the impetus behind these ungodly long sentences? Is it some sort of compulsion? Or is someone giving assignments to write the longest possible sentence, using as many phrases and clauses as possible and expressing as many different ideas as possible? Or are these sentences presented in this form as an exercise to be analyzed?02br
02br
00Many of the confused, compound complex, etc., etc. sentences I see could be cleared up and improved if it were allowed to break them into two or three sentences, but I never know if that's permitted.02br
02br
00 - A. 0-

New2grammar · Answer

0Actually, I''ve been reading more these days to improve my command of the language. I realize one of my many weak areas is ability to construct long sentences, ones that contain more than one clause. This is actually a sentence I picked up from a news article and it turns out to be a bad choice.But I have learned from this example how to interpret 01i00as02i00in double clause sentences. I guess I can call it another milestone 050010id1

Avangi · Answer

0Maybe one last shot at this: When you take the sentence in isolation, you have to give some weight to the introductory prepositional phrase. But if it's from a news article, as you say, the "shrinking hours and rising food costs" may have already been thoroughly discussed. The author may have considered this a bridge, or transition to the gas price thing, wishing to show the connection but not intending to emphasize it.02br
02br
00He might have said, "And furthermore, gas prices are - - - - - as he drives etc."02br
02br
00Or, "Shrinking hours and rising food costs are not the only problem. Gas prices are - - - - - - as he drives etc."02br
02br
00Or, "In addition to shrinking hours and rising food costs, here's another item. Gas prices etc."02br
02br
00IMHO the error is in constructing the sentence in a way that makes 01i00hours02i00 and01i00 food02i00 part of the 01u00subject02u00.02br
02br
00Something that's new to me here at EF is the approach of treating long constructions as modifying other long constructions. If you take the approach that "In addition to shrinking hours and rising food costs" modifies everything which follows, instead of just the subject, my objection seems to melt away. What do you think?0-

as

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions