reversal to vs. reversal of

LQZ

Senior Member
Mandarin
The public ire caught up yesterday triggering the reversal by the federal government to rules of March last year that relaxed the laws of property ownership in the name of market flexibility.

Dear all,

Should "reversal to" be "reversal of"? Or both are fine? Thanks.


LQZ
 
  • Myridon

    Senior Member
    English - US
    There's a difference of meaning. If you have a reversal to the March rules, you are reversing the rules since March and are back to using the March rules. If you have a reversal of the March rules, you are now using the rules that were in place before the March rules.
     

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    Thanks, everyone.

    I am still confused. Could you tell me what "that" refers to in this case?
     
    1. You have reversed the rules and are back to using the March rules. (and you had one instance of reversal)

    2. Your are now back to using the rules which was used before the March rules.
     
    Last edited:

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    "that" refers to rules of March last year.
    Thanks, bare footed bear. :) Your answer is what I think.

    I have big trouble with the oringinal text, and am still confused after reading all posts. :(

    Now I am repeatedly reading the original news, and thinking "reversal of" may be a better choice than "reversal to" depending on the context.

    Here is the context.
     
    My input :

    In your context provided above, either would work and mean the same situation.

    But they make difference in the following.


    The disturbance triggered a reversal to the new policy.

    It had once caused the government to give up the new policy. But they went on with the new policy again.

    The disturbance triggered a reversal of the new policy.

    It caused the government to give up the new policy and return to the previous one.
     
    When you go to London, you are in there.

    When you gave some money to me, the money belonged to me.


    When you relieves me of some work, I don't have the work any more.

    When you got rid of the girl, you didn't have her any more.


    a reversal is an instance : something done
     
    Last edited:

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    Thank you, coolieinblue, for your patience and reply. Now I've got it. As you said, both (reversal to and reversal of) mean the same thing. Thanks again. :)
     
    Don't mention it, LQZ

    I don't think my explantion was efficient.


    to something : a destination


    You never know the Qeen paid a visit to ME every night. :

    I am still here alive.


    They made dozens of reversals to the rules. :

    The rules were still alive. I am not sure whether the rules or the riversals were worth of them. ^^


    of something : an object

    They disposed of the garbage in the dark.
     

    bepleased

    Banned
    Chinese
    To your problem, I want to appeal to the orderliness of the mind / mentality of the language to provide a logical model capable of overcoming you stranded.

    1. Preposition you must very much respect its mentality and the logic of the language. it is a story at heart not leave it alone a word of redundancy.

    2. There, the "to" it nature is "direction" which has the two ways ----one is "in the direction of ", another is "under the direction of"; and there, it is "under the direction of "

    3. "under the direction of " is the only cutting edge to cut into your problem.
     
    Last edited:

    Loob

    Senior Member
    English UK
    Now I am repeatedly reading the original news, and thinking "reversal of" may be a better choice than "reversal to" depending on the context.

    Here is the context.
    I couldn't read your link, LQZ, but I found the article here.

    I agree with you: "reversal of" would make more sense. What appears to have happened is that the Australian Government have overturned rules made in March last year.
     
    Last edited:

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    I couldn't read your link, LQZ, but I found the article here.

    I agree with you: "reversal of" would make more sense. What appears to have happened is that the Australian Government have overtuned rules made in March last year.
    Loob, actually I repeatedly read several paragraphs (preceding ones and following) yesterday in order to deduce whether "reversal of" may be a better choice. As you know, I was confused by this "reversal to" and falied to catch up with the meaning of those paragraphs. Therefore, I posted several threads, even reworded one sentence to fully understand them.

    Now I am happy I've got it. :) Thank you, Loob, for your long-time help .

    Edit: As I said before, some links don't work.:(
     

    panjandrum

    Lapsed Moderator
    English-Ireland (top end)
    For the moment, setting aside what either preposition would normally mean, let's look carefully at the context.

    We have the topic sentence.
    The public ire caught up yesterday triggering the reversal by the federal government to rules of March last year that relaxed the laws of property ownership in the name of market flexibility.
    And here is the following sentence.

    The now-abandoned rule changes were initially flagged in late 2008 when Australia was on the edge of recession.
    This should help us to understand what happened.
    Some time in 2008, Australia flagged rule changes.
    These rule changes took effect in March 2009.
    This report is about the recent announcement that the rule changes of March 2009 are to be reversed.

    Other expressions reinforce that this is a return to an earlier arrangement: ... re-regulate, re-tightening.


    So it is clear from the context that the changes put in place in March 2009 have been undone.
    With that in mind, I would have expected "reversal ... of".
     

    LQZ

    Senior Member
    Mandarin
    Thank you, panjandrum, for your detailed analysis. I spent half a day in trying to understand it. Now, I agree with you. :) Thanks again.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top