I'm Touring The United States! Starting in June, I'm conducting private events in 23 American cities. Click here for full details.

Post Reply 
English Grammar Thread
Author Message
Meat Head Offline
Woodpecker
**

Posts: 279
Joined: Oct 2016
Reputation: 1
Post: #26
RE: English Grammar Thread
I get confused with who and whom.

Beliefs are more powerful than facts.
02-15-2017 07:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
kavi Offline
Banned

Posts: 229
Joined: Dec 2016
Post: #27
RE: English Grammar Thread
1) variance from market performance was due to post-IPO integration costs
2) variance from market performance was due to the post-IPO integration costs

"Post IPO integration costs" is rather poorly worded amd ambiguous hence you are not sure whether to use "the" or not.

The ambiguety is that we dont know if the costs relate to the actual integration that was carried out post-IPO or if they are just general costs that came after the IPO Integration.

The two meanings are below, as you can one uses "the" and one doesnt. The original sentence is trying to say both things at once.

1) variance from market performance was due to the cost(s) of the post-IPO integration.
2) variance from market performance was due to costs post IPO integration

In 1 we mean the actual cost of the integration, in 2 we mean any costs that came after the integration.

In 1 we can say costs or costs depending how you are looking at it.
(This post was last modified: 02-15-2017 11:17 PM by kavi.)
02-15-2017 10:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Paracelsus Offline
Crow
*****
Gold Member

Posts: 6,181
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 149
Post: #28
RE: English Grammar Thread
(02-15-2017 10:54 PM)kavi Wrote:  1) variance from market performance was due to post-IPO integration costs
2) variance from market performance was due to the post-IPO integration costs

"Post IPO integration costs" is rather poorly worded amd ambiguous hence you are not sure whether to use "the" or not.

The ambiguety is that we dont know if the costs relate to the actual integration that was carried out post-IPO or if they are just general costs that came after the IPO Integration.

The two meanings are below, as you can one uses "the" and one doesnt. The original sentence is trying to say both things at once.

1) variance from market performance was due to the cost(s) of the post-IPO integration.
2) variance from market performance was due to costs post IPO integration

In 1 we mean the actual cost of the integration, in 2 we mean any costs that came after the integration.

In 1 we can say costs or costs depending how you are looking at it.

I'd say both sentences are awkward because they're put in the passive voice. Consider active voice when possible:

"Performance did not match the market because of post-IPO integration costs."

Or similar.

Of course if you want to cloak a nasty truth in cushiony language, passive voice is the way to do it. After all, it's what all bureaucrats use.

One good tool for simpler, clearer writing is Ogden's Basic English. 90% of the Oxford Pocket Dictionary can be reduced down to 850 words.

Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
02-16-2017 10:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
Big Grin The best Chinglish (Chinese to English) translations Caduceus 11 1,505 10-01-2019 04:24 AM
Last Post: 66Scorpio
  Doc on English man murdered in the Philippines Danger Mouse 32 3,987 04-16-2019 10:26 PM
Last Post: Fortis
  Best English Language Bible? godfather dust 126 19,927 07-25-2018 09:04 PM
Last Post: Kid Twist

Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | RooshV.com | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication