What do 于 and 以 mean in this sentence?

[xiebing918]

Can someone please tell me what function do 于 and 以 serve in this excerpt? It seems to me (in my limited understanding of these particles' usage) that they could both have been left out and I'd still have gotten the same meaning.

 

This is Japanese chief cabinet secretary Yoshihide Suga saying China (well, he uses a subtle "we") shouldn't focus on the unfortunate past but look to the future instead:

 

"...我们不应将焦点过度集中于过去的不幸历史，我们希望中国能以面向未来的态度..."

 

For the record, my translation: "We should not focus excessively on the misfortunes of the past. We hope China will adopt a more future-oriented attitude."

 

Note I read "焦点过度集中" as "focus | over- | concentrate." I also seem to have partly answered my own question regarding 于, since I had no choice but to understand it as "adopt" or, as its sense of "to use."

 

Full news article: http://dailynews.sina.com/gb/news/int/phoenixtv/20150903/04296891284.html

 

Anyway, these two particles have always given me trouble.

 

Thanks for the help.

[陳德聰]

於 means 在 here, and 以 means 用. Shouldn't there be a main action that comes after though? That 以 implies to me that we should adopt a future-oriented attitude in doing something.

[dwq]

Yes there is.

Source

菅义伟：“二战结束已经70年，我们不应将焦点过度集中于过去的不幸历史，我们希望中国能以面向未来的态度，应对国际社会的共同挑战，我们已向中国政府表达了这一看法。”

[Demonic_Duck]

I don't think the punctuation is right.

 

菅义伟：“二战结束已经70年，我们不应将焦点过度集中于过去的不幸历史，我们希望中国能以面向未来的态度，应对国际社会的共同挑战，。我们已向中国政府表达了这一看法。”

[Demonic_Duck]

I'm not a fan of downvoting without explaining what was wrong with the post. Anyone mind explaining what was wrong with mine?

[dwq]

I didn't do it, but perhaps the person that downvoted was thinking you were drifting off-topic. Nonetheless, it was useful, I didn't really notice the punctuation until you pointed it out.

[L-F-J]

Nor did I do the downvoting, but I'd actually put a couple more full stops in there. The first two lines are full sentences too.

 

I actually wonder if there is a standard for punctuation in Chinese, or not. Because I see commas used like full stops all the time, and even full stops in the middle of sentences like commas... even in printed novels.

 

The German language has been through some grammar reformations which include strange (to me) uses of commas. Maybe Chinese just never really had a standard set?

[Demonic_Duck]

Nor did I do the downvoting, but I'd actually put a couple more full stops in there. The first two lines are full sentences too.

 

I was initially thinking the same, but then I thought of how Chinese often omits conjunctions, and reasoned that it could be seen as something like

 

“[因为]二战结束已经70年，[所以]我们不应将焦点过度集中于过去的不幸历史，[因此]我们希望中国能以面向未来的态度应对国际社会的共同挑战。”

[Messidor]

I tend to think the punctuation is acceptable, especially when the sentence is long and is spoken officially rather than printed somewhere.

 

Omission of conjunctions sometimes makes the relation between sentences subtle, eg. the relation between 我们不应将焦点过度集中于过去的不幸历史 aand 我们希望中国能以面向未来的态度 can be slightly adversative, therefore a proper conjunction here is not necessarily 因此.