the subject of “yields” is “its technology”. Then what does “yields” mean here? “Yields” takes “us” as an object. I don’t know what it means in this context.
I don’t think my transcript is grammatically correct.
The second “that-clause” (that its technology~) is not a clause, since it’s a noun phrase with a very long modifier:
a) Should the underlined ‘its’ be ‘it’s’? If so, does the whole sentence make sense?
b) If the underlined “that” is omitted, does the whole sentence make sense?
2a) No, ‘It’s’ correct as demonstrating possession. “It’s” only ever means ‘it is’. Every other meaning is without the apostrophe (it’s an exception to the usual rule).
2b) You need the ‘that’. It’s an example of a complicated sentence. Let me split it up to see if it auds understanding:
It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough, <-- For Apple designers, technology alone is never enough.
that its technology married with liberal arts, <-- It is the technology, plus the arts
married with humanities <-- and the humanities
that yields us the result <-- that gives us the end product
that makes our hearts sing. <-- that makes us happy.
(Some of us find that Apple technology doesn’t make our ‘hearts sing’ at all!)
Exactly as you say, the sentence does not make sense grammatically. It would make sense if the second “its” was “it’s”. It would also be grammatical if the word “that” was deleted before “yields”, but this seems less likely to be the intended meaning.
Assuming we change “its” to “it’s”, the subject of “yields” is (indirectly) “technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities”. The object of “yields” is “the result”, and “us” is an indirect object (the meaning is “yields to/for us”).
I disagree and as I’ve already indicated, think that the sentence makes sense once unravelled (not that it is the easiest writing to unravel, though. If it’s guilty of something, it’s too many 'that’s).
I think ‘its’ refers to “Apple” the company.
ie
Apple’s technology
It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough,/ (it is) that Apple’s technology married with Apple’s liberal arts, married with Apple’s humanities (ie, the sum of the three things)
Sorry, I don’t see it. Yes, one assumes that “its” would have to mean “Apple’s”, but, the way I’m reading it, the word “that” before “yields” scuppers that possibility. If “that” before “yields” was deleted then the sentence reads OK to me with “its” meaning Apple’s. However, from a semantic point of view it seems most likely to me that it was intended to mean:
“It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough, that it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.” = “It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough; it’s in Apple’s DNA that it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.”
[color=red]that its technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities---------This is not a complete sentence, right? So let me give it a try:
It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough, [color=red]the fact that [color=red]its technology[color=red] is married with liberal arts, married with humanities yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.
2.It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough, that [color=red]it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with humanities yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.
I think using [color=red]it’s makes it sound like a general idea.
Yes, if you retain “its” (and make other changes necessary to make the sentence grammatical), then the second part of the sentence is talking about Apple’s technology. If you change “its” to “it’s” then the second part of the sentence is talking about technology in general.
Your sentence #1 is a comma splice, however, and sentence #2 is ungrammatical. It would be grammatical if you put back the word “that” before “yields”.
(This is according to the way I read the sentence. I think Beeesneees may be reading it differently.)