Misunderstanding Purpose And Confusing It With (± Concessive) Condition

Martin & Rose (2007: 130-1):

Whereas cause obligates an effect to follow, with purpose the relevant modal meaning is inclination. We take an action because we desire an outcome. As with by for expressing means, the hypotactic conjunction to is a common way of expressing purpose:

To make an informed recommendation,
the RRC committee will use the following two information instruments.

Other conjunctions that realise purpose include so that, in case:

The RRC committee will use the following two information instruments
so that it can make an informed recommendation,

These purpose conjunctions (in order) to, so as, indicate that the outcome is desired. But there is another kind of purpose where the outcome is feared — using lest or for fear of:

the RRC committee will use the following two information instruments
lest it make an uninformed recommendation.

With concessive desire, an action is performed without the effect occurring:

The RRC committee used two information instruments,
without being able to make an informed recommendation. 

The RRC committee used two information instruments,
even so they could not make an informed recommendation.

As fear is already a negative option, there is no concessive alternative.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, here Martin & Rose misconstrue the clause complexing relation of purpose:

• because intention Q so action P

as the desire for, or fear of, the result ("outcome", 'effect") of a cause.

[2] To be clear, in case can mark a relation of cause: reason or condition, but not purpose. Cf

• He trained hard in order to get into the team (purpose)
• He trained hard in case he got into the team (condition)

[3] To be clear, these are not instances of purpose, but of concessive condition:

• if P then contrary to expectation Q

• if The RRC committee used two information instruments then contrary to expectation they could not make an informed recommendation