MarcoUE
New member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2016
- Member Type
- Interested in Language
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- France
- Current Location
- France
Does 'no useful info' unequivocally mean 'some info is present?
Regarding an event between the interaction of two distant elements, an expert in this field states:
"As far as anyone knows, there is no transmission of any useful information"
We want to know 'definitively' whether any information was transmitted.
Notes:
We as the reader, have absolutely no interest in whether the information transmitted was useful.
As a fact, we have already been informed that "there is no transmission of any useful information".
We want to know 'definitively' whether any information was transmitted.
As a native English speaker.... I would suggest that you could present this statement to 100 native English speakers, and all would respond: that 'information was transmitted only that it was not useful information'.
However.... do the rules back up this natural reaction?
My personal problem is that I understand my language implicitly.
Living in France, I have a myriad of experiences with educated English speakers, who might work through grammatical rules to a conclusion.
They ask me a rule based question, and I stop them... ask the context... and produce the answer.
Only that this one is a real biggy!
We need the rules.
'I think', doesn't really count because the outcome is too important.
The Nitty Gritty
My current thinking is that the statement alone should provide sufficient information, to produce the answer.
Let's break it down, and hope we have a grammatical expert that can align the sentence structure to the rules
"As far as anyone knows"
This we take as a fact (not an interpretation)!
It's a clause, indicating current knowledge, that in time may change.
Therefore, what follows can be accepted as factual, according to current accepted knowledge and understanding.
"there is no transmission of any useful information"
For pure grammar... we have no detailed context - the statement should be enough.
Regarding an event between the interaction of two distant elements, an expert in this field states:
"As far as anyone knows, there is no transmission of any useful information"
We want to know 'definitively' whether any information was transmitted.
Notes:
We as the reader, have absolutely no interest in whether the information transmitted was useful.
As a fact, we have already been informed that "there is no transmission of any useful information".
We want to know 'definitively' whether any information was transmitted.
As a native English speaker.... I would suggest that you could present this statement to 100 native English speakers, and all would respond: that 'information was transmitted only that it was not useful information'.
However.... do the rules back up this natural reaction?
My personal problem is that I understand my language implicitly.
Living in France, I have a myriad of experiences with educated English speakers, who might work through grammatical rules to a conclusion.
They ask me a rule based question, and I stop them... ask the context... and produce the answer.
Only that this one is a real biggy!
We need the rules.
'I think', doesn't really count because the outcome is too important.
The Nitty Gritty
My current thinking is that the statement alone should provide sufficient information, to produce the answer.
Let's break it down, and hope we have a grammatical expert that can align the sentence structure to the rules
![clear.png](http://forum.wordreference.com/styles/default/xenforo/clear.png)
"As far as anyone knows"
This we take as a fact (not an interpretation)!
It's a clause, indicating current knowledge, that in time may change.
Therefore, what follows can be accepted as factual, according to current accepted knowledge and understanding.
"there is no transmission of any useful information"
For pure grammar... we have no detailed context - the statement should be enough.
However, for general comprehension, this implicitly must involve two geographic positions as the question revolves around transmitting information
Eg. from A to B
As it happens... B responds to an event occurring at A.
In Effect
Something happened at A... and this influenced a change at B.
So the two sentence statement is:
"You could say that there is an instantaneous influence, but no one can really say what the nature of that influence is. As far as anyone knows, there is no transmission of any useful information."
Eg. from A to B
As it happens... B responds to an event occurring at A.
In Effect
Something happened at A... and this influenced a change at B.
So the two sentence statement is:
"You could say that there is an instantaneous influence, but no one can really say what the nature of that influence is. As far as anyone knows, there is no transmission of any useful information."
So that's it chaps!
You've got the context, the preamble, and the statement.
Here again is the actual statement in question:
"As far as anyone knows, there is no transmission of any useful information"
You know my views:
By stating the type of information that was not transmitted... we must concur that another type of (non-useful) information was transmitted.
But am I right?
Are there rules to determine the answer?
(I have a feeling that the rules may rely on the opening clause that relates to 'useful'.... but I await an expert opinion).