0
Denisa 0610 Posted 14 years ago
Vocabulary
LACK OF OR FOR MY LACK OF
Now, as you know my secret, I will continue, trying to explain my transformation and how I have compensated my lack of intelligence with a little usage that humans make of their intelligence, so natural to them.
Should I put "my lack of intelligence" or "for my lack of intelligence"?
Thank you.
Should I put "my lack of intelligence" or "for my lack of intelligence"?
Thank you.
Top answer
"For", but the sentence has other problems, too. I tried to edit it, but it's a translation, and I don't know what the writer had in mind, so I couldn't.
- "For", but the sentence has other problems, too.
- I tried to edit it, but it's a translation, and I don't know what the writer had in mind, so I couldn't.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
9 Answers
0
"For", but the sentence has other problems, too. I tried to edit it, but it's a translation, and I don't know what the writer had in mind, so I couldn't.
00
The point is that a person in question thinks that he is not intelligent. In other hand, humans have their innate intelligence and use it but rarely. So he compensates his lack of intelligence with the little usage that humans make of their own (innate) intelligence.
00
I must not be intelligent. I'm sorry, but I'm not getting it. Please try to explain it to me again a different way.
00
The first "person" is not a human but a disguised dog. He says for himself that he is not intelligent, he lacks intelligence. In other hand, intelligence is something natural for humans, innate; intelligence is given to humans but they don't use this gift. So he compensates his lack of intelligence with the little usage that humans make with their innate gift. He doesn't understand because he lack
00
Ah. That's a tricky thought.
Back to your original question, we compensate for a lack. To compensate a person (no "for") has come to mean to recompense him, to pay him.
Now that you know my secret, I will continue trying to explain my transformation and how I have compensated for my lack of intelligence with that little use that humans make of their intelligence, so natura
Back to your original question, we compensate for a lack. To compensate a person (no "for") has come to mean to recompense him, to pay him.
Now that you know my secret, I will continue trying to explain my transformation and how I have compensated for my lack of intelligence with that little use that humans make of their intelligence, so natura
00
0
Denisa 0610What is still obscure?How can you ask? We have a dog who is and is not a human being explicating his mental adjustments. The reader should be happy to be at least a little mystified at this point.
By the way, I've always thought that if dogs could talk they'd be really annoying.
00
You are absolutely wrong. Humans are annoying with their corruption, lack of humor, lack of good intentions, their absolute attachment to the material world, money and power, their readiness to ride over dead corpses for their egotism... A dog is ready to die to protect his master with his own body and can teach a human a lesson of love and sacrifice.
00
Denisa 0610You are absolutely wrong. Humans are annoying with their corruption, lack of humor, lack of good intentions, their absolute attachment to the material world, money and power, their readiness to ride over dead corpses for their egotism... A dog is ready to die to protect his master with his own body and can teach a human a lesson of love and sacrifice.
0
Related Questions