Do you think the highlighted sentence is grammatically correct? I haven't known the phrase " to come up for" before I read this passage .The phrase means "to reach the time when something should happen". Because it already suggests an end or kind of deadline do you think the word termination is redundant?

The sentence has a semantic confusion also for me because , what I understand from the article so far is that peasants get freedom and don't have to do land work but I get from the sentence is that their freedom comes to end ( come up for ) in 1863.The second part of the sentence ( after comma) makes sense for me but I cannot relate to the first part.I am probably wrong. So could you explain to me this sentence meaning especially with the usage of the phrase " to come up for". By the way I know " ...not only but also..." structure.My question is not concerning it.

This "emancipation", however, was barely related to what the peasants themselves were expecting. While the 360-page statute did give them "the status of free rural inhabitants," peasants were still subject to considerable taxes and a passport system to restrict movement throughout the country. In addition, the land settlement was equally as unfulfilling. Not only did freedom from land obligations only come up for termination in 1863, but also those so-called "temporary obligations" could continue until both the peasants and their local landlords came to a mutually agreeable settlement. When and if that moment ever came, the peasants would receive a small portion of the land through government- financed redemption payments to the landlord--a sum the former serfs would have to repay over a forty-nine year period.


  • It seems to me you have answered your own question. "Not only did [the freedom] first become eligible for termination in 1863, but..."
    – Andrew Leach
    Commented Sep 13, 2015 at 21:06
  • @Andrew Leach Thank you for pointing out my spelling mistake. When it comes to the sentence, do you say the sentence says " peasants' freedom ended in 1863"
    – Mrt
    Commented Sep 13, 2015 at 21:10
  • There isn't enough context yet. When was the emancipation which gave "temporary obligations"? I guess it was some years before 1863.
    – Andrew Leach
    Commented Sep 13, 2015 at 21:14

1 Answer 1


My interpretation is that the syntax is correct, and "termination" is necessary. The more common idiom "to come up" (to emerge, happen, arise, be noticed) is being combined with the prepositional phrase "for termination". The law regarding freedom from land obligations "came up" (in that it came to people's attention) in 1863, and specifically for the purpose of being terminated.

Semantically, it does seem rather confusing, I will admit. I think the author's intent was that the obligations themselves came up for termination, not the freedom from the obligations, but I don't know enough about Russian history to say which actually happened.

  • Right.This explanation makes the sentence sensible. Thanks
    – Mrt
    Commented Sep 13, 2015 at 21:26

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.