Okay, we’re past 100…

OT: From Mark Steyn this morning at The National Review

“Life-prolonging”: Who needs it? [Mark Steyn]

This subordinate clause from The Irish Independent gave me pause:

For those who can’t afford even that, there are the food queues. All across the country, people struggle desperately to hang onto their jobs, their homes, their lives. Next Tuesday, having already decided to deprive Cystic Fibrosis patients of life-prolonging treatment units, the Government will announce new ways to help us “share the pain”.

There’ll be a lot more of that in our future. If you look at the math on which the developed world is betting the future, government health systems will have huge incentives to develop ever greater institutional biases against “life-prolonging”.

[UPDATE: Whoops. Put me down for half an hour in the S&M* dungeon. An English teacher writes:

“Having already decided to deprive Cystic Fibrosis patients of life-prolonging treatment units” is not a subordinate clause; it doesn’t have a subject for the verb “decided.” It is in fact a participle phrase modifying the subject of the main clause, “the Government.”

*Subordination & Modification.]

Guess who the English teacher was?

PS: Here’s my actual email to him

Dear Mr. Steyn,

With respect, “having already decided to deprive Cystic Fibrosis patients of life-prolonging treatment units” is not a subordinate clause; it doesn’t have a subject for the verb “decided”. It is in fact a participle phrase modifying the subject of the main clause, “the Government.”

This is a very small mistake and does not interfere with the meaning of your excellent comment. However, as one of the last English teachers in the country who actually understands and teaches grammar, I felt compelled to point this out.