the government is able to shield the domestic industries fro

< Previous | Next >

chjvu

Senior Member
Vietnamese - UK English (bilingual)
Through protectionist policies, the government is able to shield the domestic industries from external harms, nevertheless,leading to the retaliations from foreign nations.

What's the participial "leading" complementary to?
 
  • Cagey

    post mod (English Only / Latin)
    English - US
    I assume that "leading to [the] retaliation[s] from foreign nations" is supposed to modify "protectionist policies". However, there are problems in the construction of the sentence that make it difficult to describe the structure accurately.

    What is the source of this sentence? Is this from something you are writing, or did you find it somewhere? We will be better able to make useful comments if we know your purpose in asking the question.

    Edit: I had changed "from foreign nations" to "by foreign nations". I withdraw my objection; see posts below.
     
    Last edited:

    lian.alon22

    Senior Member
    US
    US-English
    Cagey: You can have retaliation 'from' foreign nations. Can't you? Then again, it's getting late over here and my brain is scrambled. So maybe not.
     

    Cagey

    post mod (English Only / Latin)
    English - US
    Cagey: You can have retaliation 'from' foreign nations. Can't you? Then again, it's getting late over here and my brain is scrambled. So maybe not.
    You are right. I wouldn't use it, but I see that many respectable sources do. It's a stylistic choice, then, and I shouldn't have suggested that it was an error.
     

    DippityFisch

    New Member
    English, Paddington-Redfern accent Australia
    I would write the sentence like this:
    "Through protectionist policies, the government is able to shield domestic industries from external harm, leading to retaliation from foreign nations.
    There is no need for "harms" and nevertheless in the sentence. English as a second language speakers sometimes have unnecessary plurals. "Nevertheless" is assumed so not written.
     

    chjvu

    Senior Member
    Vietnamese - UK English (bilingual)
    It's extracted from the sources in the question sheet of my economics half yearly exams. Could i please have one tiny off-topic question? Besides "by", we could replace "from" with "of", still maintaining the acceptability of the sentence?
     

    jitendrasnv

    Banned
    India - Hindi & English
    It's extracted from the sources in the question sheet of my economics half yearly exams. Could i please have one tiny off-topic question? Besides "by", we could replace "from" with "of", still maintaining the acceptability of the sentence?

    Hello !!

    Yes the question that you asked about the replacement ,so according to me we can do and the sentence would not change in short meaning will remain same.

    Thanks
     

    Cagey

    post mod (English Only / Latin)
    English - US
    Yes, any of those prepositions would be acceptable. However, although you should omit the with by and from, you should say "to the retaliation of foreign governments." This is because you are describing the particular retaliation you are talking about, the retaliation of foreign governments. With by and from you are telling us who does the retaliating (by) or where it comes from, rather than making it a particular kind of retaliation.

    I am still having trouble with the structure of the sentence. Though I think the intended sense is clear, leading doesn't fit grammatically. The government's ability to shield domestic industry isn't leading to retaliation. The policies may lead to retaliation, but the two words are too far apart, and probably the writer does not want to say:
    Through protectionist policies leading to retaliation from foreign nations, the government is able to shield the domestic industries from external harms.
    This makes it seem that the fact that the policies lead to retaliation is somehow the reason they shield the domestic industries.
     

    chjvu

    Senior Member
    Vietnamese - UK English (bilingual)
    I know, that's what's confusing me for the whole time, but what if the sentence is set up in this order
    "The governments impose protectionist policies to shield the domestic industries, nevertheless ,leading to retaliations from foreign nations."
    Could the government here be subject to which the participial phrase is complementary?
     

    Cagey

    post mod (English Only / Latin)
    English - US
    I would say that the participial phrase has an adverbial function: it talks about the conditions under which the government imposes the policies, in particular, the result of the action.

    I think you are using "nevertheless" because you want to point out that though the government is trying to accomplish something positive, it has a negative result, retaliation. It doesn't really work, though, and I can't think of a word that would, though there may be one. If I were writing this, I would just go ahead and explain what I meant, something like:
    "The government [does this], which has the negative effect [of causing that]."
    It is more important to be clear than anything else, in my opinion. Among other things, writing cannot be interesting if the ideas in it are not accessible.
     

    chjvu

    Senior Member
    Vietnamese - UK English (bilingual)
    Thank you, Cagey

    However, speaking of participial phrase, could they operate as adverbs for the whole clause like that? Is time a big factor in the use of participial phrase?

    Another off-topic question: in present continuous tenses, does the participial play the role of subject complement?
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top