+0
Who was this guy exactly? 'Well, there's a query and a half for instance. Tops, as the myriad intricacies undoubtably associated would have it for the $64,000,000 question any day of the week.'

My question is whether 'as the....week.', if that within the quotation makrs consititues a full sentnece or whether it is in fact only a fragment. And, if it is only a fragment does the word 'Tops' beforehand do enough to 'defragmentise' it so that, then, the whole word grouping becomes a proper sentence?
1 2 3
Comments  
No, and it is very poorly written besides, but since it is spoken dialogue it needn't be complete sentences.
Mister Micawberand it is very poorly written besides
Thanks, but why is it poorly written? I can't see how it is. It strikes me for being fairly straightforward - undoubtably associated (with it, the query), etc. I can't, for the life of me, see any obfuscation there. That's just me maybe, but to convince me otherwise the whereabouts exactly of any lack of clarity would need to be pointed out. Sorry, but I'm only calling it like I see it.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Hi,
Who was this guy exactly? 'Well, there's a query and a half for instance. Tops, as the myriad intricacies undoubtably associated would have it for the $64,000,000 question any day of the week.'

My question is whether 'as the..week.', if that within the quotation makrs consititues a full sentnece or whether it is in fact only a fragment. And, if it is only a fragment does the word 'Tops' beforehand do enough to 'defragmentise' it so that, then, the whole word grouping becomes a proper sentence?

I agree with the earlier comments.
I don't know what the part in bold means.
It's typical, fragmentary, spoken English. A simpler example would be eg 'Tops, as Tom says', 'Tops' and then adding a parenthetical comment.. which is really just like saying

Clive
'.... there was another partron quietly but incontrovertibly breaking down.' A fellow of The not so Secret Society of the Basketvilles, then what was it about this guy exactly? Well, there's query and a half for instance. Tops, as the myriad intricacies undoubtably associated would have it for the $64,000,000 question any day of the week.

Hello Clive,

sorry Clive, I did say that I would get back to you sooner, but I went a bit 'awol'. You mention that you don't know what the part in bold means. I wonder if, with the additional narrative now available, if it's any clearer to you. Actually I myself don't quiet understand what the problem is: 'the myriad intriciacies, etc' just refer to the subject's (mental) condition as something that would be hard to account for! Does this post make things any clearer (for you)?

Jim
Hi,
No, that doesn't make anything clearer.

It's just poorly written.

Perhaps you'd like to have a try at rewriting your understanding of it it in the best and simplest sentences you can?

Clive
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
CliveHi,No, that doesn't make anything clearer.It's just poorly written.Perhaps you'd like to have a try at rewriting your understanding of it it in the best and simplest sentences you can?Clive
With all due respect Clive, or anyone else, but what exactly is difficult to understand there? I can accept that others might consider the piece poorly written. For sure - it's a free universe, the internet, so opinionate like you want to opinionate (provided you're not Chinese or Syrian, or from otherwhere's restricted). But great God almighty, that the piece does, still and all, not allow for simple intepretation has, while I speak, my jaw dropped! Thanks, all the same, and feel free to reply.
Well, that's at least two out of two native English-speaking moderators and English teachers here who find it poorly written, Jim. That should be very convincing proof that the sentence has a problem.

I for one cannot see how 'myriad intricacies' (being non-sentient) could 'have' anything 'Tops'.
Mister MicawberWell, that's at least two out of two native English-speaking moderators and English teachers here who find it poorly written, Jim. That should be very convincing proof that the sentence has a problem.I for one cannot see how 'myriad intricacies' (being non-sentient) could 'have' anything 'Tops'.
Here's something to consider concerning how much weight can, in certain circumstance, be given to differing contentions. Ponder Moby Dick, and be aware that, arguably, 'The Great American Novel' was universally savaged when first published. It's author never regained his reputation, and ended up employed as a night-watchman in a warehouse. It was the best part of a century, I believe, before the novel was recognised as a masterpiece. So... .
To follow the threads, my initial query was whether 'Tops, etc constituted a grammatically 'correct' sentence. I have since concluded that it does - if for no other reason that that 'Tops' is complete in itself (and that what follows is 'subordinate', and is not essential to an understanding of the (minor) sentence 'Tops'.
Mister Micwaber contends that 'myriad intricacies' in non-sentinent and therefore could not 'have' anything. Frankly, and I'm not being rude, but to have analysed it for that has me, for a moment, think I shold go back to drinking whisky and why not just stamp all over the great white whale's biography.
Here, as I see it, is the sentence labouriously exaplained: (It is) Tops (the question), as the myriad intracies undoubtedly associated (with it, the question) would have it (the question) (taken) for the $64,000,000 question any day of the week.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Show more