1

I'm reading an Economist report on mending an algorithm-related law called Section 230 and the last sentence (the part in bold, to be specific) confuses me a bit:

When platforms “alert specific users” of videos or articles, Mr Wheeler says, “conduct becomes content” and should no longer receive Section 230 protection. Some advocates of curbed immunity distinguish between benign and destructive algorithms. “Somebody has to draw a line,” Mr Wheeler says. The question facing the justices is whether a line can be found with something to recommend it.

Does the sentence read like this:

The question facing the justices // is whether a line can be found // with something to recommend it.

If so, is "with something to recommend it" meant to modify "line"? And how may I interpret it?

Or there may be another explanation:

Is "something to recommend it" just another way to say "something like an algorithm"? Then the sentence reads like this:

The question...is whether a line can be found with an algorithm.

Which assumption is more probable?

Thanks!

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

With something to recommend it modifies line (a distinction between good and bad algorithms). They need to find a point of distinction that everyone agrees is the right one.

Improve this answer
1
  • 1
    This is an example of the rule Extraposition from NP, which moves heavy relative clauses from the NP they modify, around short verb phrases to the end of the sentence.
    – John Lawler
    Commented Mar 17, 2023 at 14:53

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.