0
Stenka25 Posted 10 years ago
Vocabulary
Confused vs. Confusing
Confused vs. Confusing
The next passage comes from Justice, What's the right thing to do By Michael Sandell.
Thomas Sowell, a free-market economist, called price gouging an "emotionally powerful but economically meaningless expression that most economists pay no attention to, because it seems too confused to bother with."
In this passage the underlined clause seems too confusing.
To my non-native sense, though I've been studying English pretty serious for years, 'confused' in this clause seems to be wrong. I mean, "Confused" seems better to be replaced with 'confusing'.
The check-out of several online dictionaries presented below has showed my thought is right.
? It's a very confusing situation.
? The traffic signs are confusing.
? The statement they issued was highly confusing.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/confusing
? Several sections in that book are really confusing.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/confusing#wiktionary#btMqeuxEhrwyrA0Q.99
? For a moment he looked confused, and then turned away.
? She glanced at Yancey, who was watching her with a confused expression.
? He still looked confused and then realization lifted his brows.
? She was confused and a little annoyed by a growing desire for a more serious relationship.
? Darcie looked confused as she smiled graciously.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/confused#americanheritage#QhQZCmVE0oshhOBB.99
Don't you think 'it [=price gouging] seems too confusing to bother with' is better than 'it seems too confused to bother with'?
Regards.
P.S. I like this book. This book is about philosophy. There are innumerable books on philosophy much more serious and getting much more showers of attention. But this book is unique in trying to have an access to philosophy through myriad cases in real situations with conflicting interests. BUT The sentence above is troubling me a lot. It's hard to believe the author of this book makes a mistake in the basic sentence like this. What I really want is not to criticize the author's fault but to know what this sentence is about and what it is that I miss on this troubling word.
The next passage comes from Justice, What's the right thing to do By Michael Sandell.
Thomas Sowell, a free-market economist, called price gouging an "emotionally powerful but economically meaningless expression that most economists pay no attention to, because it seems too confused to bother with."
In this passage the underlined clause seems too confusing.
To my non-native sense, though I've been studying English pretty serious for years, 'confused' in this clause seems to be wrong. I mean, "Confused" seems better to be replaced with 'confusing'.
The check-out of several online dictionaries presented below has showed my thought is right.
? It's a very confusing situation.
? The traffic signs are confusing.
? The statement they issued was highly confusing.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/confusing
? Several sections in that book are really confusing.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/confusing#wiktionary#btMqeuxEhrwyrA0Q.99
? For a moment he looked confused, and then turned away.
? She glanced at Yancey, who was watching her with a confused expression.
? He still looked confused and then realization lifted his brows.
? She was confused and a little annoyed by a growing desire for a more serious relationship.
? Darcie looked confused as she smiled graciously.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/confused#americanheritage#QhQZCmVE0oshhOBB.99
Don't you think 'it [=price gouging] seems too confusing to bother with' is better than 'it seems too confused to bother with'?
Regards.
P.S. I like this book. This book is about philosophy. There are innumerable books on philosophy much more serious and getting much more showers of attention. But this book is unique in trying to have an access to philosophy through myriad cases in real situations with conflicting interests. BUT The sentence above is troubling me a lot. It's hard to believe the author of this book makes a mistake in the basic sentence like this. What I really want is not to criticize the author's fault but to know what this sentence is about and what it is that I miss on this troubling word.
Top answer
" The expression "price gouging" may be confusing (to readers), that is, it may cause confusion, but that's not what the writer wants to say. He wants to say that "price gouging" is (inherently, internally) a confused (murky, messy, muddy, unclear, poorly defined) concept. CJ
- " The expression "price gouging" may be confusing (to readers), that is, it may cause confusion, but that's not what the writer wants to say.
- He wants to say that "price gouging" is (inherently, internally) a confused (murky, messy, muddy, unclear, poorly defined) concept.
- CJ
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
Stenka25price gouging an "emotionally powerful but economically meaningless expression that most economists pay no attention to, because it seems too confused to bother with."The expression "price gouging" may be confusing (to readers), that is, it may cause confusion, but that's not what the writer wants to say. He wants to say that "price gouging" is (inhe
00
Thanks a lot as always, CJ.
Your reply made clear what I was puzzled about.
But in that case WHY is it that the author in the first place didn't make the sentence as follows : it seems too confused a concept to bother with?
That would prevent any unnecessary bewildering all right.
Stenka
Your reply made clear what I was puzzled about.
But in that case WHY is it that the author in the first place didn't make the sentence as follows : it seems too confused a concept to bother with?
That would prevent any unnecessary bewildering all right.
Stenka
00
Stenka25But in that case WHY is it that the author in the first place didn't make the sentence as follows : it seems too confused a concept to bother with?Why, indeed! Maybe he thought that would be too easy for the readers.
00
Related Questions