|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 15:17:39 GMT
Post by galindez on Aug 6, 2008 15:17:39 GMT
All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat, and one can hardly class it a defeat given how well the Mexican fought.
Is the bit from 'Pacquiao' grammatically correct?
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 16:04:15 GMT
Post by Dave M on Aug 6, 2008 16:04:15 GMT
Yes, I think so. My own preference would be to punctutate it slightly differently:
... , even in defeat - though one can hardly classify it a defeat, given how well the Mexican fought.
The phrase "classify it a defeat" sounds a little old-fashioned (we'd nowadays say "classify it AS a defeat"), but I think it's grammatically correct.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 16:08:58 GMT
Post by galindez on Aug 6, 2008 16:08:58 GMT
Yes, I would too, Dave. Cheers.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 22:06:07 GMT
Post by Geoff on Aug 6, 2008 22:06:07 GMT
All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat, and one can hardly class it a defeat given how well the Mexican fought. Is the bit from 'Pacquiao' grammatically correct? I couldn't make head or tail of the whole sentence. Now, thanks to Dave, I understand the last part; but is the first part correct? All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat ... Can handle ... six months ago? am I missing something? Shouldn't that be could handle?
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 23:02:34 GMT
Post by SusanB on Aug 6, 2008 23:02:34 GMT
All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat, and one can hardly class it a defeat given how well the Mexican fought. Is the bit from 'Pacquiao' grammatically correct? I couldn't make head or tail of the whole sentence. Now, thanks to Dave, I understand the last part; but is the first part correct? All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat ... Can handle ... six months ago? am I missing something? Shouldn't that be could handle? I think I find it okay - assuming that the demonstration of being able to handle whatever southpaw punchers are, implies the ability to still handle them today. But I still find it a very awkward sentence, even though I accept the grammar. And I do prefer Geoff's version.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 6, 2008 23:20:42 GMT
Post by Twoddle on Aug 6, 2008 23:20:42 GMT
I couldn't make head or tail of the whole sentence. Now, thanks to Dave, I understand the last part; but is the first part correct? All things considered, this one looks desperately tight but Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago against PACQUIAO, even in defeat ... Can handle ... six months ago? am I missing something? Shouldn't that be could handle? I think I find it okay - assuming that the demonstration of being able to handle whatever southpaw punchers are, implies the ability to still handle them today. But I still find it a very awkward sentence, even though I accept the grammar. And I do prefer Geoff's version. I couldn't read it at all, but that's thanks to a mental block of my own creation: anything to do with boxing shuts my brain off immediately.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 7, 2008 7:33:03 GMT
Post by Vadim on Aug 7, 2008 7:33:03 GMT
I couldn't read it at all, but that's thanks to a mental block of my own creation: anything to do with boxing shuts my brain off immediately. Whereas with most boxers, it takes a somewhat longer period of time for it to shut their brains off. Saying that, I do mean fully shut off, as for them to become boxers in the first place, their brain must be partly shut off.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 7, 2008 8:03:44 GMT
Post by Dave M on Aug 7, 2008 8:03:44 GMT
I think we're looking at an extract of a commentary again. Perhaps realising that helps you understand the sentence:
There a match in progress ("this one") and it's not going Marquez's way (it "looks desperately tight"). However, Marquez showed in the match six months ago against Pacqouiao that he can handle talented southpaw punchers. Actually, Marquez lost that match, but he put up such a good performance that it can hardly be classed as a defeat.
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 7, 2008 14:23:10 GMT
Post by Geoff on Aug 7, 2008 14:23:10 GMT
I couldn't make head or tail of the whole sentence. Now, thanks to Dave, I understand the last part; but is the first part correct? A re-reading and it's crystal clear. Sorry, Susan, I don't think I would change 'can' to 'could' now. You just have to love sportscasters, don't you?
|
|
|
Help!
Aug 15, 2008 0:28:15 GMT
Post by Paul Doherty on Aug 15, 2008 0:28:15 GMT
I think it's wrong, actually. Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago is OK, and even adding against PACQUIAO just works, because we add in an implied in his fight before against PACQUIAO but then even in defeat tips it over the edge because it doesn't work with the implied in his fight. So we have competing clauses -- the first requires the implied in his fight, the second forbids it!
A possibility would be Marquez showed he can handle talented southpaw punchers six months ago when defeated by PACQUIAO.
|
|