The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

many/much train opportunities / 'of which' Options
Koh Elaine
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 1:52:51 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 2,618
Neurons: 10,727
Hundreds and thousands of kilometres of train lines are being built just in Asia alone with the One Belt One Road initiative which will create so much train opportunities.

And that is why I am glad to see ST Engineering be part of this whole industry redevelopment of which I hope twenty years from today or earlier, we can proudly say that the new train line or system in Asia or Europe of which a significant component/capability comes from Singapore. And I think that can be done.


1. Shouldn't it be many train opportunities instead as 'much train opportunities', as 'much' is used for uncountable nouns?

2. I wonder whether both 'of which' are used correctly. It seems wrong to me.

3. Are there any errors in the text?

Thanks.
thar
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:17:09 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 15,868
Neurons: 63,565
Koh Elaine wrote:
Hundreds and thousands of kilometres of train lines are being built just in Asia alone with the One Belt One Road initiative which will create so much train opportunities.

And that is why I am glad to see ST Engineering be part of this whole industry redevelopment of which I hope twenty years from today or earlier, we can proudly say that the new train line or system in Asia or Europe of which a significant component/capability comes from Singapore. And I think that can be done.


1. Shouldn't it be many train opportunities instead as 'much train opportunities', as 'much' is used for
uncountable nouns?

Yes, it should be many opportunities - but what are 'train opportunities'?. You wouldn't say that building a new road creates car opportunities - and 'train opportunities' is just as meaningless. Opportunities to be a train? For trains to do something? For companies to make more trains? No - that doesn't work.
A train is an object. Even the system word 'rail' or 'railway' doesn't make sense here - because you have a plan to build a railway - fine, but what are these extra opportunities? Opportunities for an engineering firm to become involved in train manufacture?



2. I wonder whether both 'of which' are used correctly. It seems wrong to me.


The first one is actually right, in parts. Although convoluted.And the comma is wrong.
Turn it around:
I hope that twenty years from today, we can proudsly say of this whole industry redevelopment that...


The second one.... no, I give up. This writing is so terrible it is beyond fixing. No offence to the person who wrote it, but it is really bad. You appear to have nested clauses, but really I don't want to try to figure it out.


3. Are there any errors in the text?

I assume you didn't write this, since you are critiquing it. Can I ask why you are analysing it? And the newspapers? It doesn't seem to be for correction, so is it for learning? In which case, trust your instincts - you can tell this is very wrong, and if a piece is as flawed as this, don't even try.

Thanks.
Koh Elaine
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:33:47 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 2,618
Neurons: 10,727
Thanks, thar.

It was part of a speech delivered by one of our ministers.

Before submitting the thread, I was not sure if they were mistakes. Instead, I wondered it was because of my lack of command of the English language.

Again, thanks thar, for your invaluable help.
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:28:03 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 27,115
Neurons: 149,215
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Hello Koh Elaine.

I think that the minister started a long sentence and forgot what he was saying.

That sentence with the two "of which" phrases is not actually a sentence - it never ends.

I think I can see what he was trying to say.
It does happen occasionally - even with experienced 'native speakers' - you can start a sentence with one subject, then add a couple of adjectival clauses, then the verb, then a couple of adverbial clauses . . . at this point, you've forgotten how you started the sentence, so you forget to add the object.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
thar
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:40:56 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 15,868
Neurons: 63,565
Ah, if it was an ex tempore speech, that explains a lot - it is easy to lose concentration - although I still contend they should have done better.

If there was a gap between the two parts of the sentence, that could explain the chaotic structure.
(And of course I have no idea of their level of English. It is certainly better than my Mandarin or Malay! Whistle )

But it still doesn't give a good impression. They really should write some notes for a speech, or keep it simple!
Koh Elaine
Posted: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 7:08:03 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 2,618
Neurons: 10,727
The minister is an engineer. That may explain why he is not that fluent.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.