# "He had not escaped...."



## lotusfan

Look at this words :_He had not escaped because his vanity could not edure prison,but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit._

Had he escaped in fact? How could I analyse the sentence?


----------



## Blumengarten

Hi Lotusfan,

Yes, he ecaped.  I'll let you try to analyze it from there, since this seems to be an "explication of text" assignment.  Give it a shot and see what you can do!


----------



## Joelline

I agree with Blumengarten.  The clue is the verb tense "_He *had* not *escaped*_" which tells us that the event had already taken place.


----------



## mjscott

lotusfan said:


> Look at this words :_He had not escaped because his vanity could not edure prison,but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit._
> 
> Had he escaped in fact? How could I analyse the sentence?


 
He had escaped.
_He had not escaped because his vanity could not edure prison,_
_(this is not the reason he escaped)_

_but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee _
_(this *is* the reason he escaped)_

_than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit._
_(because he chose to escape and find his wife's murderer than rot in prison, an innocent man._

Hope this helps....


----------



## lotusfan

Could the sentence be rewritten as "He had escaped not because...,but because...." ?


----------



## mjscott

Yes--it sounds like it would make it clearer!


----------



## kenny4528

lotusfan said:


> _but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee _


 
I don't fully understand this sentence. Does it mean that *true murderer already escaped from prison?*


----------



## lotusfan

Thanks indeed!


----------



## lotusfan

Here the escapee, I guess,is meant to be one who commited the crime but was not found guilty.


----------



## kenny4528

lotusfan said:


> Here the escapee, I guess,is meant to be one who commited the crime but was not found guilty.


 
I think you guess right.


----------



## mjscott

I don't think so!

I think the innocent man is the one who was in jail. It sounds, in fact, like the beginning of the old television show, _The Fugitive--_where a man's wife is murdered. The man is on the run because the law believes that he is the guilty party. He has escaped in pursuit of the true murderer of his wife.


----------



## kenny4528

mjscott said:


> I don't think so!
> 
> I think the innocent man is the one who was in jail. It sounds, in fact, like the beginning of the old television show, _The Fugitive--_where a man's wife is murdered. The man is on the run because the law believes that he is the guilty party. He has escaped in pursuit of the true murderer of his wife.


I am confused. You mean the true murderer was also in jail?


----------



## Blumengarten

I don't believe that MJScott should have analyzed this sentence for Lutusfan, for two reasons:

1) this is clearly an "explication of text" homework assignment, which is a very common teaching tool used in language and literature classes to guage and improve a student's comprehension of the text;

2) furthermore, even if this wasn't a homework assignment (though I strongly believe it was), Lotusfan should have attempted the first analysis himself, in keeping with the forum's policy of asking the poster to attempt the first translation, and ask us for _corrections and clarification_ after he has made his first attempt.  In this way, we can help the poster improve his understanding of the language.


----------



## lotusfan

Blumengarten,
You shouldn't have blamed on Mjscott!
That wasn't a homework assignment at all.I'm an autonomous English learner,I came across that sentence while reading and made no sense of it.
Actually I wasn't sure of my understanding,and thanks to Mjscott's confirmation!


----------



## Blumengarten

Dear Lotusfan,

Thanks for clearing that up.  My mistake, the way you originally phrased the question, "How could I analyse the sentence?" made me think that this was an assignment that a teacher would have given you.  It is a good exercise (but oh how I hated doing explications of text when I was in college, and don't I wish we'd had the internet back then!)

Blumen


----------



## lotusfan

Dear Blumen,
It was all my fault.I didn't made my situation clear.And I understand your stance to keep the forum's policy!It is your and many other answerers' consideration and insistency that make the posters here progress in their language learning.
I very much appreciate your help!!


----------



## Forero

> He had not escaped because his vanity could not e*n*dure prison,but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit.



The meaning is:

He was put in prison for a crime he did not commit.
He was able to endure prison.  (He was not too vain to stay there.)
He wanted to find the person that murdered his wife.
He preferred looking for the murderer than to wait.
His need to find the murderer was greater than his need to honor the law (against escaping prison).
He escaped (became an escapee).


----------



## lotusfan

lotusfan said:


> Look at this words :_He had not escaped because his vanity could not edure prison,but because *he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee *than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit._


 
Do you mean the "escapee" refers to the husband,not the true murderer?I am not inclined to that explanation.I am inclined to think that the true murderer _*as an escapee* (_he wasn't found guilty by the law).


----------



## Forero

lotusfan said:


> Do you mean the "escapee" refers to the husband,not the true murderer?I



"As an escapee" looks like an adjective phrase modifying "wife", but that doesn't fit the context.  (As an adjective phrase it would have to modify the nearest previous noun or pronoun.)  Instead, "as an escapee" is an adverb phrase modifying find.

The escapee is the one who escaped after having been emprisoned for a crime he did not commit.  He chose to escape and _as_ an escapee to find his wife's murderer.  He would rather be a useful fugitive than a patient prisoner.


----------



## Jcruz

Hi everybody,
I understand from the text that the escapee is the husband. 

I hope it helps


----------



## Forero

lotusfan said:


> Do you mean the "escapee" refers to the husband,not the true murderer?I am not inclined to that explanation.I am inclined to think that the true murderer _*as an escapee* (_he wasn't found guilty by the law).



_As_ is a preposition similar to _like_ but with the idea of identity rather than mere similarity.


----------



## lotusfan

Hello Forero,
Your argument is reasonable.But I still think that "As an escapee" is truely an adjective phrase modifying the proceeding noun phrase "the true murderer of his wife",of which the central idea is "the true murderer", other than merely the nearest proceeding noun "wife" you mentioned.


----------



## Blumengarten

lotusfan said:


> Hello Forero,
> Your argument is reasonable.But I still think that "As an escapee" is truely an adjective phrase modifying the proceeding noun phrase "the true murderer of his wife",of which the central idea is "the true murderer", other than merely the nearest proceeding noun "wife" you mentioned.



"he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee"

When I originally read this sentence, it was clear to me that "as an escapee" modified "he" (the prisoner), but it is easy to see where the confusion comes from, because the adjectival phrase should follow the noun it's modifying ... in this case, either "his wife" or "the murderer of his wife".  It would be clearer if the author had worded the sentence,

"he, as an escapee, would rather find the true murder of his wife ..."

thereby eliminating all confusion, except for it doesn't "flow" as nicely on the page.  This construction would fall under the category of "poetic license."


----------



## kenny4528

Hi, Blumengarten

So do you mean that original sentence is a little ambiguous(in the wording)?


----------



## GreenWhiteBlue

There is no ambiguity in the sentence.  It is clear from this that the true murderer is not in prison; indeed, the true murderer has not yet even been found. Instead, the husband was convicted of killing his wife -- which he did not do -- and imprisoned for it. The husband has now escaped. Some people might assume that the reason the husband escaped was because his vanity could not endure being in prison, but that is not correct. The reason the husband escaped was in order to look for the true murderer. 

It really would have been easier to understand this sentence if it had been constructed as "He escaped not because ... but because ...", which is what the sentence means.


----------



## Blumengarten

kenny4528 said:


> Hi, Blumengarten
> 
> So do you mean that original sentence is a little ambiguous(in the wording)?



Yes Kenny, it is!  The reason I understood the meaning clearly is that this sentence seems to be referring to the TV show or movie "The Fugutive" and I was already familiar with the story.  For someone who doesn't know the background, it would certainly be confusing!


----------



## Blumengarten

> He had not escaped because his vanity could not endure prison, but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit.



In reviewing the posts on this thread, it seems that the Americans have no problem understanding this sentence, while the foreigners are.  I don't believe this is simply because we are native-born speakers, but also because we are familiar with the background story.  Without that context, it doesn't seem perfectly clear whether "the true murderer of his wife" is not also an escapee.


----------



## kenny4528

Thanks, But to tell the truth, at first I saw this sentence, I associate that the true murderer was also in prison, but then he might find a way to get away from the prison. Afterward, the man was going to chase the true murderer.----just according to original sentence, that seems to be reasonable to me.


----------



## kenny4528

Blumengarten said:


> In reviewing the posts on this thread, it seems that the Americans have no problem understanding this sentence, while the foreigners are. I don't believe this is simply because we are native-born speakers, but also because we are familiar with the background story. Without that context, it doesn't seem perfectly clear whether "the true murderer of his wife" is not also an escapee.


 
That is what I mean.


----------



## kenny4528

Forero said:


> "As an escapee" looks like an adjective phrase modifying "wife", but that doesn't fit the context. (As an adjective phrase it would have to modify the nearest previous noun or pronoun.) Instead, "as an escapee" is an adverb phrase modifying find.
> 
> The escapee is the one who escaped after having been emprisoned for a crime he did not commit. He chose to escape and _as_ an escapee to find his wife's murderer. He would rather be a useful fugitive than a patient prisoner.


 
Also, adjective phrase "As an escapee", I think, is more likely to modify the _*true murderer*_, not the *wife*.( just personal thought , same as *lotusfan*)


----------



## cuchuflete

This:





GreenWhiteBlue said:


> There is no ambiguity in the sentence.  It is clear from this that the true murderer is not in prison; indeed, the true murderer has not yet even been found. Instead, the husband was convicted of killing his wife -- which he did not do -- and imprisoned for it. The husband has now escaped. Some people might assume that the reason the husband escaped was because his vanity could not endure being in prison, but that is not correct. The reason the husband escaped was in order to look for the true murderer.
> 
> It really would have been easier to understand this sentence if it had been constructed as "He escaped not because ... but because ...", which is what the sentence means.




perfectly explains this:


> _He had not escaped because his vanity could not e*n*dure prison,but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit._



I cannot improve on GWB's explanation, but will offer a few words to help show my agreement with it. (I am not swayed by dim memories of television program(me)s. TV was black and white and full of snow in those days, and the horizontal hold didn't work any better than the vertical hold, and I get confused between memories of _The Fugitive_ and_ I led three lives_.)

He had escaped, but not because his vanity could not endure prison.  He had escaped because he
wanted to find the true murderer of his wife.  He would rather do that—find the true murderer— as an ecapee, than wait in prison.  He did not commit the crime. (Had not committed the crime.)





I guess the only remaining question, for those who like idle speculations, is what he would do if he were to find the true murderer...

Turn him over to the police?
Try to kill him?
Thank him?


----------



## Forero

Blumengarten said:


> In reviewing the posts on this thread, it seems that the Americans have no problem understanding this sentence, while the foreigners are.  I don't believe this is simply because we are native-born speakers, but also because we are familiar with the background story.  Without that context, it doesn't seem perfectly clear whether "the true murderer of his wife" is not also an escapee.



I did not immediately think "The Fugitive" when I read the sentence, and though I found it confusing, I worked out the meaning.

Here's how I worked it out:

1. The word _edure_ does not exist, but _endure_ fits with prison and the escape idea.  New version:

He had not escaped because his vanity could not e*n*dure prison, but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit.

2. The word _not_ appears to be misplaced.

2A. If the correct reading were "He had not escaped, but ...", then something contrary to his having escaped should follow.  Instead we have "but because", which cannot contrast with "not escaped" - it is nowhere near a parallel construction, which proper style would dictate, neither is it a logical contrast.

2B. So "but because" must contrast with "not because".  The word *not* apparently has gotten misplaced because a modernizing rule blocks "escaped not" and "but because" is too far away.  To prevent the stark double-take, a comma would serve to separate _escaped_ and _not_:

He had escaped*, not* because his vanity could not endure prison, but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit.

3. The phrase "as an escapee" appears to be misplaced too.

3A. The quickest reading would be "wife as an escapee".  That is illogical since his wife has been murdered but "as" implies "living as".

3B. Another possible reading would be "murderer of his wife as an escapee", with the phrase having been misplaced to prevent the sequence "murderer as an escapee of his wife".  That reading is possible but not probable because the word _escapee_ is generally reserved for one who has commited the crime of escape and does not normally apply to someone who has gotten off scot free.

3C. What about "he would rather find, as an escapee, the true murderer ..."?  With or without the commas, this would separate _find_ from its direct object, which violates a rule for which English is (in)famous.  This rule excuses the "misplacement" of the "as" phrase, so this _is_ a possible reading, but not very pretty.

3D. The other ways to "correct" the apparent misplacement of the "as" phrase all mean the same thing:

"... because, as an escapee, he would rather ...", or
"... because he, as an escapee, would rather ...", or
"... because he would, as an escapee, rather ...", or
"... because he would rather, as an escapee, find the murderer ...".

Any of these might work, but they do seem to imply that he was already an escapee when he was deciding whether to wait or go find the murderer.

3E. The sentence does not flow well, but the author's intention may be to use this complicated sentence to illustrate the intelligence, perseverance, and soul-searching process of "The Fugitive".  So I guess we'll stick with

He had escaped, not because his vanity could not endure prison, but because he would rather find the true murderer of his wife as an escapee than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit.

- with the meaning as we have indicated, or even the original sentence, but with the word _endure_) and the same meaning.


----------



## kenny4528

After I asked several friends(none of them is native-speaker) via the internet, I have to admit that this sentence seems not to be ambiguous to them. They think immediately that the true murderer is not in prison; indeed, the true murderer has not yet even been found. They know nothing of the background story of this sentence, but are able to understand the fact that true murderer is never in prison. I might, I think, over-complicate the original sentence. 

Btw, thanks for excellent explanations, Forero, cuchuflete and the other friends.


----------



## lotusfan

> Originally Posted by *Forero: *
> *3B. ......the word escapee is generally reserved for one who has commited the crime of escape and does not normally apply to someone who has gotten off scot free*.


 

*Forero *has made a sound and thorough analysis!And if the statement he made, as quoted above, would be generally acknowledged,this will be my final embarrassing argument.


----------



## jennball

If 'not' is moved so that the sentence reads 'not because', as suggested by Lotusfan, the sentence makes immediate sense. With 'not' in its original position, the sentence is ambiguous until you reach 'but because', at which point you understand that the man has indeed escaped. 'Not because' is needed to match 'but because'.


----------



## panjandrum

kenny4528 said:


> After I asked several friends(none of them is native-speaker) via the internet, I have to admit that this sentence seems not to be ambiguous to them. They think immediately that the true murderer is not in prison; indeed, the true murderer has not yet even been found. They know nothing of the background story of this sentence, but are able to understand the fact that true murderer is never in prison. [...]


That is a curious and deeply interesting point.  

I agree with the detailed analyses, and especially enjoyed Forero's exposition.  There is no doubt that the sentence could be expressed more clearly. Yet some read the sentence and quickly get (what we believe to be) the intended meaning.

I suspect it has something to do with the way we read and how much of the text is perceived. 

Native speakers accustomed to reading, and to reading large blocks of text, will perceive that sentence first as a block, then sets of normally-collocated words making up the block and then the connections between them.  A kind of top-down analysis of the sentence in which some of the apparent illogicalities are eliminated based on evidence from elsewhere in the sentence.


On a whole-sentence scale, if you start reading the sentence with the words "... rather ... than wait in prison for a crime he did not commit," in your mind and you read "He had not escaped because his vanity could not endure prison," as a block, then the possibility of "He had not escaped" meaning that he was still in prison simply does not arise. 

On a slightly more detailed level, look at the first part:
"He had not escaped because his vanity could not endure prison, ..."
"He had not escaped" meaning he was still in prison is not consistent with the reason given.  That reason, "his vanity could not endure prison", is a reason FOR escape, not for staying in prison. So an alternative understanding of "He had not escaped" is called for.

The same kind of process compensates for the rather eccentric placing of as an escapee, and associates that with "he", not the murderer or the victim.

Learners of English will work the meaning of the sentence from the meaning of the words, and therefore be thrown off the track by a somewhat unconventional word order.


----------



## badgrammar

Yes, most definitely, the innocent husband escaped from jail.  he became the escapee.  He went looking for the person who did commit the crime but was never caught.  And the reason he did escape was not because prison was too hard for him to endure, but rather, to find the person who killed his wife, even if that meant living life as a "convict on the run".

It is a tricky sentence, but I am sure of its meaning.


----------



## kenny4528

panjandrum said:


> Learners of English will work the meaning of the sentence from the meaning of the words, and therefore be thrown off the track by a somewhat unconventional word order.


I think you make a good point. And I have to say my friends might be good at analysing sentence.


----------



## AWordLover

Hi All,

Thank you Panj your analysis seems to capture an essential  part of the mystery about this sentence.

By the time I had read to the end of the sentence, I understood its meaning to be that of the current concensus view. I didn't conciously have any sense of the type of insightful analysis that Forero described so well. I completely agree that, although taken as an entirety the sentence is not ambiguious, the pieces of the puzzle needed to calculate the meaning of the sentence come late in the sentence.

I had the sense that the author (intentionally or not) was leading the reader a little way down a false trail before yanking him back. This temporarily misleading quality of the sentence happened more than once.

Best regards,
AWordLover


----------



## srta chicken

He (person A) had not escaped because his (A's) vanity could not endure prison,but because he (A) would rather find the true murderer (peron B) of his (A's) wife as an escapee (i.e. while A was an escapee) than wait in prison for a crime he (A) did not commit.

This passage implies that the true murderer is out of prison (A wanted to find him). No one may even know who the true murderer is, from this amount of text.


----------



## AWordLover

srta chicken said:


> He (person A) had not escaped because his (A's) vanity could not endure prison,but because he (A) would rather find the true murderer (peron B) of his (A's) wife as an escapee (i.e. while A was an escapee) than wait in prison for a crime he (A) did not commit.
> 
> This passage implies that the true murderer is out of prison (A wanted to find him). No one may even know who the true murderer is, from this amount of text.


 
Actually B's location is not constrained. We have no reason to believe he is in prison, but he may be in prison for some incident unrelated to the murder of A's wife.


----------



## kenny4528

AWordLover said:


> Actually B's location is not constrained. We have no reason to believe he is in prison, but he may be in prison for some incident unrelated to the murder of A's wife.


 
That is what I infer in the begining. I must be affected by the plot of *The Shawshank Redemption. *


----------



## AWordLover

kenny4528 said:


> That is what I infer in the begining. I must be affected by the plot of *The Shawshank Redemption. *


 
Nothing in the text tells us where B is located, we only know that A wanted to get out of prison to look for B.


----------



## kenny4528

AWordLover said:


> Nothing in the text tells us where B is located, we only know that A wanted to get out of prison to look for B.


Yes, exactly.


----------

