In sentence 1 the main verb phrase is '
this may occur at a diminishing rate' and the sentence ends with 'subject to diminishing returns'. Therefore the sentence is heavily weighted against SETs.In sentence 2 the main verb phrase is that SETs can still be expected to increase profits. The sentence does, however, end with diminishing returns. Overall, this can be described in footballing terms as a 2-1 win for SETs.
The last two sentences differ from the first two in that the verbs are not ranked. The sentences depend upon causality -
'because' - rather than assessment and comparison - 'although' and 'while'. Therefore the distinctions between main and subordinate verbs are not as clear as in sentences 1 and 2.The third sentence begins with a strong statement in favour of SETs, then undermines this by repeating
'diminishing' as the sentence ends. It is therefore perfectly balanced, or, to use another footballing analogy, a 2-2 draw. However, it ends on a downbeat, as though the home team had gone two up but then thrown away their lead.The last sentence is perhaps slightly more favourable to SETs as it places the main verb in the middle and only ends with one '
diminishing'.
Consider the sentences again, and think about how their management of emphasis might affect their position in a line of argument.
Imagine four different essays about SETs, each containing one of the sentences.
Which sentence would be best as the first sentence of an essay?
Which would work best as the first sentence of a paragraph somewhere within an essay?
Which might appear in the middle of a paragraph, and which might end a paragraph - or conceivably an entire essay?
What would you expect immediately before and after each sentence?
Course Contents / Academic Editing Service
© 2002 Martin Paterson