只是就算让他倾尽一切，能为安安提供的，也只有那么一点点的小东西。 I think it has something to do with how the persona would give everything to provide for his child (An-An). But I feel like my understanding of it is lacking, and the wording too. I would greatly appreciate some help (๑ ˊ͈ ᐞ ˋ͈ )ƅ̋
I think it's trying to say that even if he gave his all into providing for An-An, the help/support he could be was limited.
I don't see anything about limited help or support......so I'm not sure if I missed anything. Anyway, here's how I see it. 只是就算让他倾尽一切, Only(,) even if (you) let him do all he can/give all he has, It might make more sense if you substitute "could" for "let". Or just take it out. "Only, even if he could give all he has," 能为安安提供的, what he could provide for An An, 也只有那么一点点的小东西。 also only (had) that little bit of things. It makes more sense in English if you say, "was also only that little bit of things." What you could do here, because of the way it's said, is move the "things" from the last phrase to the second phrase. Chinese has a quirk where they use 的 to make that whole phrase before it a noun (what exactly is a noun depends on the text). It gives an emphasis on the last part, in my opinion. So the meaning is the same even if you move "things." Only, even if he could give all he has, the things he could provide for An An, was also only that little bit. My grammar is not especially marvelous, so I'm unsure about two parts. Should it be "even if he could give all he has", or "even if he could give all he had"? I think it's already past tense because of "could", maybe. Should it be "was also only that little bit", or "were also only that little bit"? I used was because I was looking at "bit", which is singular.
Thank you for explaining it so nicely! I even learned something new with your reply. I'm really grateful, thanks again!