austra...

ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) is the source for that information.

The author is stating where the information ("people were donating money to buy more eggs") came from.

(The word order is a little bit awkward, but I think they just wanted to make sure the source for that information was included.)

這個回答有幫到你嗎？

日語

@Kairozu Thank you. But, my point is why the author did not write it as: On Saturday, people were donating funds online to cover the teenager’s legal fees, and to help him buy “more eggs.” the ABC reported.

已刪除帳號的用戶

They might not want to end the article with "the ABC reported" since they are a different news organization.

But they could have written:
On Saturday, the ABC reported that people were donating funds online to cover the teenager's legal fees, and to help him "buy more eggs."

The meaning for all three sentences is the same, and the emphasis doesn't change with the word order in this case. It could just be personal preference of the author.

這個回答有幫到你嗎？

日語

I think the sentence you suggested sounds very natural. I thought that something was intended so the author delibelatery used that word order in the paragraph.

日語

@Kairozu Sorry that I'm still sticking to this silly question :) Yes, as you said, they might not want to end the article with "the ABC reported" because the article belongs to NYtimes. But this morning I got a possible reason which is that the author might want to end the article with the humor, that might not be the fact from the source, that might be the author's idea and he added it there and closed the article with the humorous sentence.

已刪除帳號的用戶

@NK_Futures Oh don't apologize, I enjoy talking about it! :)

I do think the "ABC reported" part was to state the source -- otherwise the NY Times would have to research the donations for "more eggs" themselves, before they could include it as a fact.

But, when I re-read the article, I do agree that the whole sentence may have been chosen to end the article "on a lighter note."

這個回答有幫到你嗎？

日語

Thank you. Your first idea is very convincing. I was inclined to agree with you. Then I visited ABC news page and found a sentence like this: A fundraising page set up to collect donations to cover the teenager's legal fees and to buy "more eggs" had raised almost $20,000 by 12:00 pm on Sunday. So, now I think your second idea is more possible. By the way, In my opinion, that 17 years old boy was wrong. I mean, he did it in a wrong way. He should have smashed an egg from the position two steps back so that he was able to smash the second one onto his face when the senator turned to the boy without having punched :) I do not mean to say he did the right thing though.

已刪除帳號的用戶

@NK_Futures Yeah, the true meaning of the sentence is a little bit ambiguous, maybe that was the author's intent.

As for the boy, well, I suppose throwing eggs is never a ~good~ idea, but I understand why he was angry. His egging technique could use some work. :) The senator sounds like a jerk that thrives on conflict. :/

這個回答有幫到你嗎？