0

I'm reading this article, there is a sentence as follow:

It would be foolish, not to mention a waste of time, to recount Wenger’s glories at Arsenal

I don't understand what does it mean by not to mention a waste of time here.

Does it mean it's a waste of time if not recount Wenger's glories at Arsenal?

Please explain for me,

Thanks.

closed as off-topic by Kris, David, Davo, Chris H, Skooba Jul 18 '17 at 15:34

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

1

The part after not to mention can be substituted for the part just before it.

It would be foolish to recount Wenger's glories at Arsenal.

But I could also mention that

it would be a waste of time to recount Wenger's glories at Arsenal.

The writer means that there are so many glories, and everybody knows about them, that it would be a waste of time to mention all of them.

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