In the second paragraph of this newspaper article, the author said,

On Wednesday, Ito disclosed that he had separately received $1.2 million from Epstein for investment funds under his control, in addition to five hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars that he acknowledged Epstein had donated to the lab.

Ito above is the former MIT Media Lab head, who recently over a scandal tying him with Epstein.

Does investment funds in this context mean funds which are to be used for investing, or is it this type of investment funds, defined as "a way of investing money alongside other investors in order to benefit from the inherent advantages of working as part of a group"?

  • 1
    "for investment funds" does not mean "to invest in funds" o "as funds for investment", but "to be added to (already established) investment funds".
    – Gustavson
    Sep 8, 2019 at 22:00

1 Answer 1


In that sentence, the term "investment funds" is almost certainly intended to refer to the financial construct (where multiple people put money together to invest in something). So in this case, the sentence could instead have been (perhaps more clearly) phrased as:

... had separately received $1.2 million from Epstein to be put into investment funds which he controlled, ...

It is true that the way things are phrased in the original sentence, it could also theoretically be read as "to become funds for investing, and giving him control over the funds". However, at this point the term "investment funds" is so well established and understood to mean particular financial device that it is unlikely that anybody would use the term to mean the more general sense of just "funds for investing" anymore (and if they did they would have to be careful to make it clear that was what they meant, which was not done here).

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .