<Nor> was there much of a theory of afterlife.

Omid9798

Member
Persian
1) Why has the writer used "nor" at the beginning of a sentence? and what does this bold part mean?

2) Would you tell me what the whole paragraph means here?

Paragraph:

"Their worship was linked to the rituals connected with one's progress through life—birth, marriage, and death— and with invoking protection against danger, making prophecies, and promoting healing, rather than to any code of behavior. Nor was there much of a theory of afterlife." (TOEFL Exam)


Thanks
 
  • grassy

    Senior Member
    Polish
    It's strange, I agree. I'd read it as: "There was not any code of behavior, nor was there much of a theory of afterlife."

    Can you give us an earlier sentence?
     

    suzi br

    Senior Member
    English / England
    I suppose there is an implied "not" in the first sentence: "there was "not" any code of behaviour stipulated" Then the next sentence follow with this ideas: nor was there another feature of many religions: no theory of the afterlife
     

    lingobingo

    Senior Member
    English - England
    Nor basically means “and not”, but it’s usually used after another negative statement. Here, it only reads oddly because the preceding statement is positive. But I agree with suzi that there is a hint of negativity in “rather than…”.

    Nor was there much of a theory of afterlife.
    And [moreover,] there was not much of a theory of afterlife.
     

    Omid9798

    Member
    Persian
    It's the whole text:

    "Third, Greek philosophy was opened up to the philosophy and religion of the East. At the peak of the Greek city-state, religion played an important part. Its gods—such as Zeus, father of the gods, and his wife Hera—were thought of very much as being like human beings but with superhuman abilities. Their worship was linked to the rituals connected with one's progress through life—birth, marriage, and death— and with invoking protection against danger, making prophecies, and promoting healing, rather than to any code of behavior. Nor was there much of a theory of afterlife. "
     

    PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    I think that a full-stop is a little strong, a dash might have been better. The first sentence describes their worship. This is completely unconnected to "the theory of an afterlife".

    I would take Nor was there much of a theory of afterlife." to mean And neither was there...
     

    Omid9798

    Member
    Persian
    Thanks everybody. I really appreciate. So all in all, does it mean?

    "At their rituals that was being held during different events (birth, marriage, and death) in their lives, they worship gods. They also worship gods during the times that they wanted gods to help them against dangers, the times they wanted to make a prophecy about future, and the times that they wanted someone to be cured sooner. They did all of the the mentioned things instead of having and establishing a pattern and structure for their behaviors and their interactions and also instead of having much of a theory for their afterlife (They did not have any code of behavior and much of a theory of afterlife)"

    Thanks.
     

    grassy

    Senior Member
    Polish
    The first sentence describes their worship. This is completely unconnected to "the theory of an afterlife".
    It should be connected in the sense of "X isn't the case and Y isn't the case either". That connection is not very clear, however.
     

    PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    No.
    They did all of the the things mentioned above. Their worship was not related to a particular moral code and also they did not possess much of a theory of an afterlife
    (They did not have any code of behavior and much of a theory of afterlife)"
    They had a code of behaviour, but this was not religiously based, and their ideas about the afterlife (or if there were one) were vague.
     

    PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    It should be connected in the sense of "X isn't the case and Y isn't the case either". That connection is not very clear, however.
    I assume you mean, as I did
    "They were a poor family living in the Mid-West. They didn't have a car, a TV, or new clothes. Nor holidays abroad."

    In that "They didn't have a car, a TV, or new clothes" relate to immediate and local poverty, and "holidays abroad" can be considered as a marker of poverty, it is not in the same direct class of what is being described: it is an adjunct to the thought - hence the new sentence.
     

    grassy

    Senior Member
    Polish
    OK, but, unlike in the OP paragraph, you can easily infer the implied words from the previous sentence: Nor (did they have) holidays abroad.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top