0

I think the relevance of A to B is idiomatic, so The relevance of a global history of textile production in the passage should be corrected as The relevance to global history of textile production or The relevance of textile production to global history. Do you agree?

The relevance of a global history of textile production over a long period of time is clear. It is therefore no wonder that historians have paid so much attention to the basic processes in producing textiles: spinning and weaving. Numerous regional and national studies on developments in the production of and trade in textiles have been published. Textile products cater for a basic human need. They are among the most important goods fabricated and traded by mankind and have thus played a central role in human activities throughout history. Moreover, textiles have also been at the centre of several crucial historical debates. Theories on proto-industrialization, the Industrial Revolution, technological and business history, the history of taste and fashion and the gendered division of labour often take the textile industry as a point of reference.

The Ashgate Companion to the History of Textile Workers, 1650–2000

4
  • 1
    No. It is relevant (to something already stated or implied) that there is a global history of textile production. Jun 4 at 7:15
  • But this is the first passage of the book. Could you find something already stated or implied?
    – user131753
    Jun 4 at 8:18
  • Your link is to Google Books, which hides pages, including (for me) the passage you quoted. However, the title is clear; the book is about the history of textile workers, and the fact of a long history of global textile production is, as the writer says, clearly relevant to that. Jun 4 at 8:30
  • To clarify: Google Books sometimes hides pages of books, and also different people may get to see different pages. Jun 4 at 9:18
1

You don't have to use the preposition 'to' in the same sentence when speaking about relevance - you can simply say something is relevant and it would be assumed that you meant it in relation to the thing already being discussed.

Your statement is not saying that textile production is relevant to history - it is saying that the history itself is relevant.

You must log in to answer this question.

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