0
NL888 Posted 12 years ago
Grammar
Should "apart from the fact" be "confirming to the fact"?
Confirm to the fact (the culture makes no female its idol). So the Prince is deified but not the Queen.
Context:
The Prince is a handsome man who would have cut an
imposing figure in his white naval uniform and plumed helmet, and
it is perhaps not surprising that he, rather than the Queen, was
elevated in this way, quite apart from the fact that the culture of the
islanders made it difficult for them to accept a female deity.
Context:
The Prince is a handsome man who would have cut an
imposing figure in his white naval uniform and plumed helmet, and
it is perhaps not surprising that he, rather than the Queen, was
elevated in this way, quite apart from the fact that the culture of the
islanders made it difficult for them to accept a female deity.
Top answer
No. Consider this simpler example. eg Mary loves Tom because he is handsome and funny, quite apart from the fact that he is a billionaire.
- No.
- Consider this simpler example.
- eg Mary loves Tom because he is handsome and funny, quite apart from the fact that he is a billionaire.
- The idea is that the third reason (he's rich) does not even need to be considered, as the first two are enough.
- Clive
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
No.
Consider this simpler example.
eg Mary loves Tom because he is handsome and funny, quite apart from the fact that he is a billionaire.
The idea is that the third reason (he's rich) does not even need to be considered, as the first two ar
Consider this simpler example.
eg Mary loves Tom because he is handsome and funny, quite apart from the fact that he is a billionaire.
The idea is that the third reason (he's rich) does not even need to be considered, as the first two ar
00
Thanks for replying.
But I'm still confused.
If these two are sufficient condition to be deified. the Queen should also be made a godess there. See more context:
The Queen and Prince Philip visited the area in 1974, and the
Prince subsequently became deified in a rerun of a John-Frum-type
cult (once again, note how rapidly the details in religious evolution can change). Th
But I'm still confused.
If these two are sufficient condition to be deified. the Queen should also be made a godess there. See more context:
The Queen and Prince Philip visited the area in 1974, and the
Prince subsequently became deified in a rerun of a John-Frum-type
cult (once again, note how rapidly the details in religious evolution can change). Th
00
In broad terms, his great appearance was enough reason for him to be deified. The fact that the Queen is a woman was not a major reason for his deification.
00
Thanks.
But should " not a major reason for his deification" be " not a major obstacle for his deification"?
But should " not a major reason for his deification" be " not a major obstacle for his deification"?
00
The Prince was a fine, impressive looking fellow, more impressive looking than the Queen. This is why he was deified and she was not. In addition, she probably wouldn't have been deified anyway, because this group prefers gods to goddesses. She played no part in their decision, neither helping nor hindering his deification.
0
Related Questions