4
   

Which is better?

 
 
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 07:52 am

1) in the country’s rush to modernization.
2) in the country’s rush to modernize.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 4 • Views: 694 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
PUNKEY
 
  2  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 09:33 am
Two different meanings. What do you want to say?
0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 12:54 pm
A couple of points:

1. I am used to using the following general distinction: we rush for things (nouns) and we rush to actions (verbs).

The rush for gold, the rush for Arctic oil, the rush for Supreme Court review of health reform, The rush for digital skills, the rush for retail space...

Cambridge (UK) Online Dictionary:

Quote:
rush noun ( HURRY )

[S] when you have to hurry or move somewhere quickly
Slow down! What's the rush?
Why is it always such a rush to get ready in the mornings?
Everyone seemed to be in a rush.
He was in a rush to get home.
They were in no rush to sell the house.

[S] when a lot of things are happening or a lot of people are trying to do or get something
There's always a rush to get the best seats.
I try to do my shopping before the Christmas rush.
There's been a rush for (= sudden popular demand for) tickets.

[S] when something or someone suddenly moves somewhere quickly
There was a rush of air as she opened the door.
They made a rush at him to get his gun.

[S] a sudden movement of people to a certain area, usually because of some economic advantage
the California gold rush

[C] in American football, an attempt to run forwards carrying the ball, or an attempt to quickly reach and stop a player from the opposing team who is carrying the ball


2. In general, in US English, modernize is spelled with a z, and British English has 'modernise'.

Of course, these things are largely a matter of style. You will find plenty of rushes to nouns and rushes for verbs, and plenty of British spelling of -ise rather than -ize, but I would prefer a rush to modernise or a rush for modernisation.
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2011 05:00 pm
@contrex,
Thank you.
Are you telling the 1) and 2) have the same meaning?
But PUNKEY says they are different.
contrex
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 12:01 am
@oristarA,
oristarA wrote:
Are you telling the 1) and 2) have the same meaning?


How much value do you place on PUNKEY's pronouncements? He has not said what the different meanings are.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 01:26 am
@oristarA,
PUNKEY is correct.
The first version refers to a concrete fact == modernization (a noun).
The second version refers to the action of achieving this concerete state -- to modernize (a verb).
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  0  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 05:37 am
@oristarA,

Punkey is wrong.

They are materially the same, for practical purposes.
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 09:45 am
@McTag,
Quote:
They are materially the same, for practical purposes.


I agree with this fellow, the bureaucrat who was the immediate aide to the PM in the British TV series Yes Minister. Smile

I also agree with C, except that I think that using 'for' in this particular case doesn't sound as direct, as involved, as going for the real thing as "to modernization" does.

Without having given this a great deal of thought, maybe there are certain nouns, because of their nature, sound better with one or the other.

the rush for California vs the rush to California

the rush to the gold fields vs the rush for the gold fields

Confused
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 10:13 am
@JTT,

I'll take that as a compliment. Sir Humphrey was very careful in his use of language.

Smile
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2011 10:17 am
@McTag,
How droll, Minister. Smile
0 Replies
 
PUNKEY
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 06:14 am
Ori - Can you see the difference?

1) in the country’s rush to modernization of its transportation system

2) in the country’s rush to modernize its transportation system
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 09:29 am
@PUNKEY,
I'd like to understand what the difference is that you discern, Punkey.
0 Replies
 
oristarA
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 11:22 am
@PUNKEY,
PUNKEY wrote:

Ori - Can you see the difference?

1) in the country’s rush to modernization of its transportation system

2) in the country’s rush to modernize its transportation system



An excellent question!

1) To emphasize the consequence.
2) To emphasize the action, the progress.

But in my view, all you guys here have showed the manner of a wise man.

Thank you!
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 02:29 pm
@PUNKEY,
I wasn't being facetious or a smart ass, Punkey. I truly would like to understand where you see a difference.

Native speakers often miss other meanings because their minds fixate on what they first gloss as the meaning. You're a native speaker and you may well see something that the rest of us are missing.

It wouldn't be the first time that McTag missed something. Smile
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2011 02:38 pm

Lead, guiding light. I await illumination.

I can't see a ha'porth of difference (in the meaning) between them.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

deal - Question by WBYeats
Let pupils abandon spelling rules, says academic - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Please, I need help. - Question by imsak
Is this sentence grammatically correct? - Question by Sydney-Strock
"come from" - Question by mcook
concentrated - Question by WBYeats
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Which is better?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 12:13:59