(reflecting inflation, productivity growth and perhaps a rebound in workers’ share of economic output

Confused about the grammar with ( ) in a sentence

Hi there,
I recently read a sentece from the Econimist ()
----
The Federal Reserve’s 2% inflation target is compatible with wage growth of only about 3-4% (reflecting inflation, productivity growth and perhaps a rebound in workers’ share of economic output).
----
I am confused about the grammar usage of reflecting in this sentence.
I am not sure how I can paraphrase it and how it works in this part. Does 'reflecting' only reflect inflation or cover the following stuff all together?
What is more, how to use () is another challenge for me.

Thanks.

Xin Z said:

I'm confused about the grammar with ( ) the brackets and one of the words inside them in a sentence. (This should not have been your title. Your title should be the sentence you're asking us about. Your request and explanation should be in the main body of your post.)

Hi there, Unnecessary. Just go ahead with your question.
I recently read a the following sentence from in The Economist.
----
The Federal Reserve’s 2% inflation target is compatible with wage growth of only about 3-4% (reflecting inflation, productivity growth and perhaps a rebound in workers’ share of economic output).
----
I am confused about the grammar usage of "reflecting" in this that sentence. I am not sure how I can paraphrase it and how it works. in this part. Does 'reflecting' only reflect inflation or cover the following stuff all together?
What is more, How to use () brackets is another also a challenge for me.

Thanks. Unnecessary. Thank us after we help you, by adding the "Thanks" icon to any helpful response.

Click to expand...

Brackets are used when you want to add extra information but that information isn't necessarily vital to the surrounding sentence or, in the case of your example, not vital to understanding the part before the brackets.

In that example, "reflecting" refers to "inflation", and "productivity growth" and "perhaps a rebound in workers' share of economic output".

The Federal Reserve’s 2% inflation target is compatible with wage growth of only about 3-4% (reflecting inflation, productivity growth and perhaps a rebound in workers’ share of economic output).

The passage seems to say:
Although the wage growth is low (only about 3-4%),
the Federal Reserve's inflation target is 2%,
which is compatible with this low wage growth
because it considers
> inflation
> productivity growth
> and perhaps a rebound in workers’ share of economic output

Ms. Worth said:

Although the wage growth is low (only about 3-4%),
the Federal Reserve's inflation target is 2%,

Click to expand...

Wrong. It doesn't say the wage growth is only 3 or 4 percent. It only says the inflation target is compatible with only such a wage growth.

Ms. Worth said:

which is compatible with this low wage growth
because it considers

Click to expand...

No "because". It just means the inflation target considers the things in brackets. It doesn't mean the target is compatible with the wage growth because it considers the things in brackets. I don't know where you get the "because" from.

Barque said:

Wrong. It doesn't say the wage growth is only 3 or 4 percent. It only says the inflation target is compatible with only such a wage growth.



No "because". It just means the inflation target considers the things in brackets. It doesn't mean the target is compatible with the wage growth because it considers the things in brackets. I don't know where you get the "because" from.

Click to expand...

Hi, Barque ~

You might be right, but I will stick with my analysis.

Inappropriate personal comment removed - 5jj

I have deleted a number of inappropriate posts, and blocked this thread,

Members are reminded that the forum is a place for civil discussion, not petty squabbling.