1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of buying a car from them.

I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is strange although I guess one can understand it.

A buyer would be wary of buying a car from them.

But why call that person 'a buyer' if they haven't made up their mind yet? That would only make sense if that person was some sort of a professional buyer.

The buyer has bought the car! The person who was wary was not yet a buyer.

--

Gratefully
Navi

Lost in the Twilight Zone of the English language
Obsessed with ambiguity
Interested in strange structures

navi wrote:

> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of buying a car from them.

> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is strange although I guess one can understand it.

> A buyer would be wary of buying a car from them.

> But why call that person 'a buyer' if they haven't made up their mind yet? That would only make sense if that person was some sort of a professional buyer.

> The buyer has bought the car! The person who was wary was not yet a buyer.

potential buyer

prospective buyer

possible buyer



Would-be buyer -------- sort of suggests the party didn't (or wasn't going to) buy it.

Le 13/04/2024 à 04:39, navi a écrit :
>
> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of
> buying a car from them.
>
> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is
> strange although I guess one can understand it.
> A buyer would be wary of buying a car from them.

No, it doesn't work.

They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer. People would be wary of
buying a car from them.

> But why call that person 'a buyer' if they haven't made up their mind
> yet? That would only make sense if that person was some sort of a
> professional buyer.
>
> The buyer has bought the car! The person who was wary was not yet a buyer.

Hmm. People who have the intention to buy, aren't they buyers? They may
not have bought a car yet, but they've made up their mind to buy a car
from someone.

HenHanna wrote:

> navi wrote:

>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of buying a car from them.

>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is strange although I guess one can understand it.

>> A buyer would be wary of buying a car from them.

>> But why call that person 'a buyer' if they haven't made up their mind yet? That would only make sense if that person was some sort of a professional buyer.

>> The buyer has bought the car! The person who was wary was not yet a buyer.

> potential buyer
> prospective buyer
> possible buyer

> Would-be buyer -------- sort of suggests the party didn't (or wasn't going to) buy it.


also... Shopper, Window shopper, ...

On 13/04/24 18:13, Hibou wrote:
> Le 13/04/2024 à 04:39, navi a écrit :
>>
>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be
>> wary of buying a car from them.
>>
>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works.
>> It is strange although I guess one can understand it. A buyer would
>> be wary of buying a car from them.
>
> No, it doesn't work.
>
> They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer. People would be wary
> of buying a car from them.

Yes. It's so much clearer when broken into two sentences. By trying to
pack too much into a single sentence, the original writer ended up
saying the opposite of what was intended.

Long sentences are considered acceptable in many languages, but I think
the general feeling among today's English speakers is that short
sentences are superior in terms of good writing style.

(Yes, that was a longer-than-average sentence, but I think we do accept
two related statements spliced together with "but". An "and" splice
would score a little worse on the style scale.)

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 21:49:32 +1000, Peter Moylan
<peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:

>On 13/04/24 18:13, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 13/04/2024 à 04:39, navi a écrit :
>>>
>>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be
>>> wary of buying a car from them.
>>>
>>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works.
>>> It is strange although I guess one can understand it. A buyer would
>>> be wary of buying a car from them.
>>
>> No, it doesn't work.
>>
>> They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer. People would be wary
>> of buying a car from them.
>
>Yes. It's so much clearer when broken into two sentences. By trying to
>pack too much into a single sentence, the original writer ended up
>saying the opposite of what was intended.
>
>Long sentences are considered acceptable in many languages, but I think
>the general feeling among today's English speakers is that short
>sentences are superior in terms of good writing style.

I still generate text in long sentences. I am still learning how to
edit myself into shorter sentences so they will be easier to read.

I remember what convinced me short sentences were better: When
Roy C. was writing up his research for publicantion, I gave him a few
paragraphs on the data analyses I had done for him. Long sentences.

He re-wrote it into short sentences, and asked me if it was still
okay. He had done only a little rearrangement, and changed a few
words, but it was SO much easier to read. I mean, even though I
wrote the original, I found his version clearer and easier to read.

Before then, when I recognized that something I wrote was turgid, I
typically started over pretty much from scratch. His re-write gave me
a fine example of how-to-edit. I remind myself of it every day.

>
>(Yes, that was a longer-than-average sentence, but I think we do accept
>two related statements spliced together with "but". An "and" splice
>would score a little worse on the style scale.)

--
Rich Ulrich

"Navi":
> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of
> buying a car from them.
>
> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is
> strange although I guess one can understand it.

Yes, it works.
> But why call that person 'a buyer' if they haven't made up their mind
> yet?

Because you're overthinking it. Also, see the signature quote.
--
Mark Brader "'Taxpayer' includes any person
Toronto whether or not liable to pay tax..."
msb@vex.net -- Income Tax Act of Canada, s.248(1)

My text in this article is in the public domain.

Mark Brader wrote:

> "Navi":
>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of
>> buying a car from them.
>>
>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is
>> strange although I guess one can understand it.

> Yes, it works.

Yes, but I'd say that at a minimum it should be fixed this way:

1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, _as people_ would be wary of
buying a car from them.

The present version brings too close of identity the sets of "buyers" and "people being wary of buying."

--
Marius Hancu

"Navi":
>>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary of
>>> buying a car from them.
>>>
>>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is
>>> strange although I guess one can understand it.

Marius Hancu:
> ...I'd say that at a minimum it should be fixed this way:
>
> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, _as people_
> would be wary of buying a car from them.

You, too, are overthinking it.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Volts are like proof." --Steve Summit
msb@vex.net | "Trains are like libraries." --Michael Enright

My text in this article is in the public domain.

El Sun, 14 Apr 2024 03:59:19 +0000, Mark Brader escribió:

> "Navi":
>> 1) They knew it would be difficult to find a buyer, who would be wary
>> of buying a car from them.
>>
>> I read something like that somewhere, but I am not sure it works. It is
>> strange although I guess one can understand it.
>
> Yes, it works.

Does it? Not for me. Doesn't mean anything to my eyes.

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es

El Sat, 13 Apr 2024 21:49:32 +1000, Peter Moylan escribió:

> Long sentences are considered acceptable in many languages, but I think
> the general feeling among today's English speakers is that short
> sentences are superior in terms of good writing style.

I read quite a bit of German and often find myself having to re-read
stuff several times to make something make sense. Then it's often a
lightbulb moment.

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es

On 16/04/24 19:51, Paul Carmichael wrote:
> El Sat, 13 Apr 2024 21:49:32 +1000, Peter Moylan escribió:
>
>> Long sentences are considered acceptable in many languages, but I
>> think the general feeling among today's English speakers is that
>> short sentences are superior in terms of good writing style.
>
> I read quite a bit of German and often find myself having to re-read
> stuff several times to make something make sense. Then it's often a
> lightbulb moment.

There's an old story about a conference that provided simultaneous
translation into several languages. A German was speaking, and suddenly
the translation into English went silent. After a couple of minutes, the
anglophones heard "The verb, man, where's the verb?"

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

El Tue, 16 Apr 2024 22:08:53 +1000, Peter Moylan escribió:

> There's an old story about a conference that provided simultaneous
> translation into several languages. A German was speaking, and suddenly
> the translation into English went silent. After a couple of minutes, the
> anglophones heard "The verb, man, where's the verb?"

You mean, of course, the *main* verb. I'm sure you know that German word
order (usually) demands that a verb be the second element. Albeit an
auxilliary/modal.

--
Paul.

https://paulc.es

Paul Carmichael wrote:

> You mean, of course, the *main* verb. I'm sure you know that German word
> order (usually) demands that a verb be the second element. Albeit an
> auxilliary/modal.

That is true in the main clause. In the subordinate clause the verb is
the very last word.

--
Bertel
Kolt, Denmark