1

There is a sentence.

the image of green consumerism as associated in the past with more eccentric members of society has virtually disappeared.

It meant

The image of green consumerism has virtually disappeared. Because the image was related with eccentric members of society in the past.

Or

The image of green consumerism related with eccentric eccentric members of society in the past has virtually disappeared.

I don't know how to translate sentences. When prepositions are used like that 'as associated in the past with more eccentric members'

I do not get what 'with clause' decorates in the sentence.

1

The original sentence doesn't mean the same thing as either of the rephrased versions.

The first rephrased version is the most wrong, because the original says nothing about reasons of any kind, it just states a fact.

However, the second is also wrong, because the original doesn't mention eccentric members of society of the past, but past associations of green consumerism with eccentric members of society.


If you want a rephrased version of the original sentence, consider the following:

What has virtually disappeared today is the past association of the image of green consumerism with more eccentric members of society.


Simplifying it significantly, at the risk of leaving out some meaning, the following could be said:

Today, we seldom associate green consumerism with eccentric behaviour.

Or:

Buying and eating vegan, vegetarian, and organic foods is now considered normal.

You must log in to answer this question.

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