>>28470686it's not a matter of mistranslated word for word, it's a matter of mistranslated of practical linguistics. Unless whatever typist or editor last touched that line had some kind of aneurysm while doing it, there's literally NO WAY to make those two concurrent statements in that kind of format without having them explicitly reference one another's shared object. You might as well have a headline reading:
>NEW CANDY FLAVOR TO BE REVEALED!! PAPAYA'S ARE SWEET...?!and say, "B-but... but.... they never said the new candy flavor would be sweet! They're just stating an unrelated non sequitur as the ONLY other complementing piece of information in that blurb"
