I understand the meaning of the following sentence, but I am not able to parse it satisfactorily. Has something been omitted between "as" and "destroyed"?
"The estate was left to him on such terms as destroyed half the value of the bequest."
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Hi, MilSim. When paired with "SUCH", "AS" functions as a relative pronoun. In the sentence under discussion, "as" serves as the subject of the relative attributive clause. "Destroyed half the value of the bequest" is the predicate. As to the tense of the verb in the relative clause, it is contingent upon the context, not necessarily the simple past.
@f6pafd posted:Hi, MilSim. When paired with "SUCH", "AS" functions as a relative pronoun. In the sentence under discussion, "as" serves as the subject of the relative attributive clause. "Destroyed half the value of the bequest" is the predicate. As to the tense of the verb in the relative clause, it is contingent upon the context, not necessarily the simple past.
Thank you, f6pafd, for your reply. I realised precisely what you wrote about the verb not necessarily being in the simple past at a moment when I was unable to update my post, but I have now fixed it accordingly. Thank you!
I also realised somewhat late that this is another instance of the oft-discussed construction "as can be seen" (and its variations). There seem to be several "camps" when it comes to the role "as" plays (two interesting discussions can be found here and here). I appreciate your input and will search for a further treatment of the matter in my grammars (if you have any particular suggestions, please do share!)
@MlleSim posted:I understand the meaning of the following sentence, but I am not able to parse it satisfactorily. Has something been omitted between "as" and "destroyed"?
"The estate was left to him on such terms as destroyed half the value of the bequest."
I find the quotation in question extremely unnatural with the "such terms as" when it could be written so much more simply as follows:
Of course, "which" could be replaced with "that," and there is also the possibility of a reduced relative clause: "terms destroying half the value."
@David, Moderator posted:I find the quotation in question extremely unnatural with the "such terms as" when it could be written so much more simply as follows:
- The estate was left to him on terms which destroyed half the value of the bequest.
I definitely agree with you, but the quotation comes from Sense and Sensibility, so perhaps it was more natural in the 1800s.
Just out of curiosity, do you agree with f6pafd regarding the role played by "as" ?
@MlleSim posted:I definitely agree with you, but the quotation comes from Sense and Sensibility, so perhaps it was more natural in the 1800s.
Just out of curiosity, do you agree with f6pafd regarding the role played by "as" ?
We always ask that quotations be cited when quotations are given, regardless of how historically illustrious the source. I'm perfectly fine with treating "as" as a relative pronoun (or as relative pronoun–like) in this type of usage, regardless of BillJ's crusade against that analysis at the Stack Exchange. Note that "as" can also function as (or as if it were) an object within a clause in which it acts like a relative pronoun:
