"The brief makes clear that the argument presented to the court by the acting solicitor general, contending that Mr. Ashcroft is immune from prosecution and all but ignoring the disgraceful conduct from which he seeks immunity, is hardly Justice Department gospel."
I feel a little bit confused about the above sentence, especially the clause "contending that Mr. Ashcroft is immune from prosecution and all but ignoring the disgraceful conduct from which he seeks immunity".
I'm wondering who "contending that" and what "all but ignoring" means here. In particularly, what do "all" and "he", noted with red color, refer to in this sentence.
Thanks in advance.
When you say "all but" it is like saying almost. In this sentence, it means that something was almost completely ignored. It is a strange use of "all." Do not worry too much about it. It is a colloquial expression.
If I contend that you are one of the best writers at EssayForum, it means I argue in favor of the view that you are one of the best.
Does that help?
:-)
Thanks kevin.
But I still feel a little bit bewildered. Can you explain who take the actions "contend" and "ignore"?
Yeah, this is a really hard sentence.
Okay, well here is the deal:
The brief is a piece of paper that gives some information.
The brief explains that an argument that was made by someone called the solicitor general is not "gospel." In this case, gospel refers to the Holy Bible, and it is a figure of speech. It means that it is not the way the justice department usually works. It is not the "bible" of the justice department. It is an exception to a rule.
The brief says the argument is not the justice department's norm.
The argument "contends" that Ashcroft is immune and "all but" ignores his disgraceful conduct. That means it almost ignores his disgraceful conduct and "contends" (i.e. "argues") that he is immune from prosecution.
If you still have questions, let's talk some more. I think many people will benefit when they read this thread.
:-)
EF_Kevin
Thanks again Kevin
Actually I came across this hard sentence when I was reading a editorial in The New York Times. How do you think of articles there? Do they good for improving my writing English?
I think they are good. A newspaper usually is written with sentences that are not too complicated. However, if you read about a topic that is confusing, such as finance or politics, you might find unusual words.
Anyway, do not get frustrated. Make a collection of the confusing sentences, and talk about them with people here in the forums.
"The brief makes clear that the argument presented to the court by the acting solicitor general, contending that Mr. Ashcroft is immune from prosecution and all but ignoring the disgraceful conduct from which he seeks immunity, is hardly Justice Department gospel."
As far as my understanding, those words are use in law. Very confusing and suppose to be clearly written. That's way lawyer fee is so high because lay people have difficulty to understand it.
