To what "that" is related in the following context?
"

Italy's economy may have contracted for the past three years but one sector is giving entrepreneurs and investors some confidence: technology start-ups.

The growing success of Europe's technology sector has often focused on the powerhouses of the U.K. and Germany but Italy is beginning to gain traction.

Italy, the fourth largest economy in the Europe, was one of the worst hit during the financial crisis and the mistrust of large companies ***that*** rose during this period is one of the reasons people are flocking to start-ups, one investor said. "

In the last sentence I'm confused whether "that" relates to "mistrust" or "companies". Both could rise, and I cannot understand what?
And how to determine it? Is "that" usually refers the first or the second word in a phrase like "some of something"?

I have copied this from here
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/12/italy-europes-next-big-tech-start-up-hub.html

Question

To what "that" is related in the following context?
"

Italy's economy may have contracted for the past three years but one sector is giving entrepreneurs and investors some confidence: technology start-ups.

The growing success of Europe's technology sector has often focused on the powerhouses of the U.K. and Germany but Italy is beginning to gain traction.

Italy, the fourth largest economy in the Europe, was one of the worst hit during the financial crisis and the mistrust of large companies ***that*** rose during this period is one of the reasons people are flocking to start-ups, one investor said. "

In the last sentence I'm confused whether "that" relates to "mistrust" or "companies". Both could rise, and I cannot understand what?
And how to determine it? Is "that" usually refers the first or the second word in a phrase like "some of something"?

I have copied this from here
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/12/italy-europes-next-big-tech-start-up-hub.html

Answer

That refers to the mistrust here, but you can only really tell from context. I can see why it's confusing.

It's not companies here because it says "rose". That's usually not used in respect to companies, and if it were, it would mean startup companies, but the sentence goes on to contrast the situation with startups.

Answer

You are correct, it is not clear and could relate to either. This is a source of confusion in English, when a meaning is ambiguous.

Is it mistrust of 'large companies that rose' only?
Or is it that mistrust rose in all large companies?

I would say it is the second one, just because it is more likely to be true. It is more likely that mistrust rose in all large companies, than it is likely to be that there is mistrust in large companies that rose.

Why more likely? That's a difficult one to answer, and it certainly isn't clear, but people often distrust large companies. If it were that they distrusted large companies that rose during this period, I would expect a reason to be given of why that was. Poeple wouldn't automatically distrust rising companies during a period, unless there was a reason, say if there were a lot of corruption at that time. I would expect to see a reason there.

There isn't a rule to follow, just know that native speakers have the same problem. Is a 'small business manager' a manager of small business, or a busines manager who is small??!  Impossible to say ;-)

Answers · 4

Still haven’t found your answers?

Don’t miss out on the opportunity to learn a language from the comfort of your own home. Browse our selection of experienced language tutors and enroll in your first lesson now!