Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The following are acceptable expressions that I have heard:

"Preaching to the choir"

"Preaching to the converted"

To me, both mean essentially that you are trying to explain something to someone who already understands it. So you are wasting your time. (Edit: Although GEdgar's definition is better: "Arguing a controversial subject only with those who already share your opinion")

My friend is suggesting that there is a subtle difference in the meaning between the two. Is he right?

Edit: He suggests that the former has the implied context that very few people are listening- preachers normally preach to a congregation. The latter does not.

share|improve this question
2  
Sounds like you two aren't reading from the same hymn sheet... –  Matt Эллен Jun 27 '12 at 8:42
    
Why the downvote? –  Urbycoz Jun 29 '12 at 8:36
1  
Instead of: "explaining something to someone who already understands it" I would say: "arguing a controversial subject only with those who already share your opinion". –  GEdgar Jul 18 '12 at 18:18
    
@GEdgar Ooh I like that. I've added it to the question. –  Urbycoz Jul 19 '12 at 7:41

3 Answers 3

up vote 3 down vote accepted

They are essentially synonymous, but some could read some subtlety.

Both a choir and the converted are "true" believers, and therefore don't need to be preached to. But the converted are those who did not believe before, and believe now, whereas the choir could be those who always believed.

I don't think this is necessarily a big difference, but you may choose one over the other depending on your exact context.

Also, the OED notes a geographical difference:

  • to preach to the converted and variants: to advocate something to people who already share one's convictions about its merits or importance. Also (orig. and chiefly U.S.) to preach to the choir.
share|improve this answer
    
Hmm. But no one could have "always believed" something. There must have been some point in his life when he was convinced. He wasn't born believing anything. If you take the words literally, I suppose being in the choir implies some level of commitment to the cause: you're actually doing some work, standing in front of a crowd and proclaiming your beliefs, etc, while just being converted, you could sit silently at home and be converted. But it's not always meaningful to parse an idiom that closely. –  Jay Jun 27 '12 at 16:09
    
@Jay: Well, many people have been brought up in a religious family and may not question their belief, and may not be able to pinpoint the moment they were convinced. And the converted may also show commitment in having made that conscious decision to convert and possibly are more enthusiastic than the "already-believers". But I agree too close analysis doesn't always help. –  Hugo Jun 27 '12 at 17:26
    
I keep reading 'convinced' as 'convicted'. –  Mitch Jul 18 '12 at 17:25

I've always seen the difference as being that "preaching the choir" represents targeting people who have a stronger level of belief than the converted (with the congregation somewhere in between); since they've gone beyond simply being members to having made a commitment to attend regularly and participate in a more visible manor than the rest of the congregation.

share|improve this answer

They are synonomous in their intended epigraphic meaning of 'exhorting people who are already convinced.

But there are some nuances.

  • 'choir' is 'Christian'-centric (part of many christian services is a special section of the congregation is the choir.

  • 'the converted' have a tendency to be more gung ho than the life-time nothing-is-new members of the believers.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.