貢献を認められて / 引きつけた / 再話 / 大きく分けて二つ

Hi


1. 彼は国への貢献を認められてナイト爵位を与えられた。

Translation given: "He was awarded a knighthood in acknowledgement of his services to the nation."

Is 認められて an indirect passive, i.e. his services were recognised (by persons unstated), and that affected him?


2. The text is talking about using comparisons in order to make numbers and statistics more easily visualisable. The example just given is 「世界がもし１００人の村だったら」. Then it says:

・・・結局人々を引きつけた理由というのは、実感だったのではないだろうか。

What does 人々を引きつけた mean?


3. 注： 「世界がもし１００人の村だったら」池田査代子再話、Ｃ．ダグラス・ラミス対訳 マガジンハウス

a) Is it saying that 池田査代子 repeated the phrase originally used by Ｃ．ダグラス・ラミス?

b) According to the dictionary, 対訳 means "original text with its translation printed side by side or on opposite page". Is it saying that Ｃ．ダグラス・ラミス wrote a text with 「世界がもし１００人の村だったら」 in both Japanese and (presumably) English?

c) How is マガジンハウス connected to the rest of the statement?


4. 大きな数を実感する方法が、大きく分けて二つ紹介されています。

I guess that this is basically saying that methods of visualising large numbers are introduced (in the text), and something about these methods being broadly divided into two types. However, I do not exactly understand the grammar that connects 大きく分けて二つ to the rest of the sentence Does 二つ modify 紹介されています? Is 大きく分けて an adverbial phrase?

1)
That's 持主受身 "possesser's passive". The object (= what is acknowledged by the nation) is HIS services.

取られる / ときと / 次の情報 / がいんです | Japan Forum

2)
to attract/draw people's attention

3)
池田香代子

I googled it, since 再話 doesn't make much sense in that context. 世界がもし１００人の村だったら was originally from a story spread in the internet. 池田香代子 and C・ダグラス・ラミス was talked about it(再話 is used since the story was already talked in the net) and ダグラス wrote the Japanese translation part.

c)
It's the name of the publishing company.

4)
方法が二つ紹介されています makes sense? (林檎が二つあります, コーヒーを二杯飲みます,,,)
And yes, 大きく分けて is an adverbial phrase.

Thank you!

1) Right, actually I reviewed that thread, but my understanding was that this "possessor's passive" is just a type of indirect passive. Is that not correct? Or were you not implying that my description "indirect passive" is actually wrong, but just that "possessor's passive" is more specific?

2) Here is the whole sentence:

近年「世界がもし１００人の村だったら」という見方がブームになったが、結局人々を引きつけた理由というのは、実感だったのではないだろうか。

I understand that the first part is saying that the 「世界がもし１００人の村だったら」 method has become popular in recent years. Is the second part saying that ultimately (結局) the reason this method attracted people (= is popular) is that it gave them a feeling of being able to really visualise something?

4) Yes, I'm fine with 方法が二つ紹介されています, but I was also expecting the idea of 二つ to be attached to 大きく分けて, so I wasn't quite sure where 二つ belonged.

1)
Your understanding is correct. Possessor's passive is a type of indirect passive, thus, 彼は国への貢献を認められた is a possessor's passive, and at the same time, an indirect passive, of course. I just wanted to point out that possessor's passive doesn't have a nuance of "that affected him", which 迷惑受身 has.

The reason why the passive voice is used here is to unify the subject of the two clauses. When the first clause is non-passive 貢献を認めて, the subject of it must be stated, such like 政府は彼の国への貢献を認め、彼はナイト爵位を与えられた. This sentence sounds a bit awkward. It's far natural to continue two clauses with the same topic.

2)
Yes.

Thanks Toritoribe.