Reply
Thu 28 Aug, 2014 01:22 am
1)Does "a fish in so tiny a barrel" mean "a turtle in a small jar"?
2) Do "vulnerable and self-abased" here serve as adjectives?
Context:
I confess that, as a critic of religion, I have paid too little attention to the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. Frankly, it always felt unsportsmanlike to shoot so large and languorous a fish in so tiny a barrel. This scandal was one of the most spectacular “own goals” in the history of religion, and there seemed to be no need to deride faith at its most vulnerable and self-abased. Even in retrospect, it is easy to understand the impulse to avert one’s eyes: Just imagine a pious mother and father sending their beloved child to the Church of a Thousand Hands for spiritual instruction, only to have him raped and terrified into silence by threats of hell. And then imagine this occurring to tens of thousands of children in our own time—and to children beyond reckoning for over a thousand years. The spectacle of faith so utterly misplaced, and so fully betrayed, is simply too depressing to think about.
"to shoot fish in a barrel"
This is an idiom.
Imagine a barrel of water with fish in it. They are trapped there. You want to kill them. There is no sport or contest. You have all the advantage.
@PUNKEY,
Cool.
Who would like to answer the second question:
2) Do "vulnerable and self-abased" here serve as adjectives?
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:2) Do "vulnerable and self-abased" here serve as adjectives?
This is an odd question. Since they clearly are adjectives, then that what they obviously "serve as".
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
oristarA wrote:2) Do "vulnerable and self-abased" here serve as adjectives?
This is an odd question. Since they clearly are adjectives, then that what they obviously "serve as".
I could understand this:
At its most basic level, life is what replicates itself -- but how did it begin?
"At...(noun)" structure is understandable, "at... adjective" seems ungrammatical.
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
"At...(noun)" structure is understandable, "at... adjective" seems ungrammatical.
It is perfectly grammatical
faith at its most vulnerable and self-abased.
fire at its most hot and bright
Ice at its most cold
pain at its most severe
vanity and selfishness at their most ugly
chicken at its most delicious
insects and reptiles at their most repulsive
These adjectives should be modifying, not faith, but somewhere that faith is at, like a point.
“faith at its most vulnerable and self-abased point”
Otherwise, they read as incomplete sentences.
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
These adjectives should be modifying, not faith, but somewhere that faith is at, like a point.
“faith at its most vulnerable and self-abased point”
Otherwise, they read as incomplete sentences.
No they don't. This is steak at its most delicious. The sentence is complete.
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
These adjectives should be modifying, not faith, but somewhere that faith is at, like a point.
“faith at its most vulnerable and self-abased point”
Otherwise, they read as incomplete sentences.
No they don't. This is steak at its most delicious. The sentence is complete.
Ok, then the expression "at its most ____ " is an idiomatic one.
Here's a minor question ocurring when I read another book:
Quote: (The plant had just introduced robots on the manufacturing line) After watching the production line and learning that the plant produced ninety-four cars per worker per year, Deng remarked that this was ninety-three cars a year better than China's best, the First Automobile Works in Changchun. When he finished touring the Nissan factory, Deng declared, "Now I understand what modernization is."
" this was
ninety-three cars a year better than China's best"?
64-63 = 1 Does it mean China's best worker produced one car a year?
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
Ok, then the expression "at its most ____ " is an idiomatic one.
Define "idiomatic" as you are using it here.
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote: " this was ninety-three cars a year better than China's best"?
The plant that had just introduced robots produced 94 cars
per worker per year. That figure is obtained by dividing the number of cars produced each year by the number of workers. Thus 10 workers might produce 940 cars in a year, or 1,000 workers might produce 94,000 cars. Deng's remark conveyed that China's best plant had a production rate of (94-93) cars per worker per year, i.e. 1 car per worker per year. In that plant, to produce 940 cars in a year would require 940 workers.
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
oristarA wrote: " this was ninety-three cars a year better than China's best"?
The plant that had just introduced robots produced 94 cars
per worker per year. That figure is obtained by dividing the number of cars produced each year by the number of workers. Thus 10 workers might produce 940 cars in a year, or 1,000 workers might produce 94,000 cars. Deng's remark conveyed that China's best plant had a production rate of (94-93) cars per worker per year, i.e. 1 car per worker per year. In that plant, to produce 940 cars in a year would require 940 workers.
So I've guessed it right at the very begining? But it is only a guess, though confirmed by you, I'm still confused the grammatical structure of " this was ninety-three cars a year better than China's best".
Supposed McTag can post 38 posts a day in A2K and a newbie who's very difficult with English language can only post one, can I describe it as:
This was 37 posts a day better than the newbie？
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:I'm still confused the grammatical structure of " this was ninety-three cars a year better than China's best".
Deng meant "ninety-three cars per person per year".
Quote:Supposed McTag can post 38 posts a day in A2K and a newbie who's very difficult with English language can only post one, can I describe it as:
This was 37 posts a day better than the newbie？
Yes, you can describe it thus - 37 posts a day better than the newbie, or 37 posts a day more than the newbie, the first makes a value judgement (more is better) the second is just factual.
On our hunting trip, I killed five deer and you killed two. My score is three better/larger than yours, and your score is three worse/smaller than mine.
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
Ok, then the expression "at its most ____ " is an idiomatic one.
Define "idiomatic" as you are using it here.
It is in regard to the word idiom, "a speech form or an expression of a given language that is peculiar to itself grammatically or cannot be understood from the individual meanings of its elements." (from the American Heritage Dictionary)
@InfraBlue,
I would hesitate to describe a construction like "[noun] at its most [adjective]" as idiomatic. It can be perfectly well understood from the individual meanings of its elements e.g.:
Steak - a cut of of meat
at its most - at some maximum state or level, described by a following adjective
delicious - good to eat.
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
I would hesitate to describe a construction like "[noun] at its most [adjective]" as idiomatic. It can be perfectly well understood from the individual meanings of its elements e.g.:
Steak - a cut of of meat
at its most - at some maximum state or level, described by a following adjective
delicious - good to eat.
But see, that's what I was pointing out, the adjective is describing that maximum state or level, or as I suggested, a point, "most delicious state/level/point." It's not directly describing the steak itself. In that it's idiomatic. Sure, it's understandable, but it doesn't follow typical grammatical conventions.
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote: it's understandable, but it doesn't follow typical grammatical conventions.
"Typical"? I don't know what to say, except that English is not algebra or Lego. Are you a native English speaker?
Selected Answer
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace