Timeline for area or area size?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 15, 2023 at 17:45 | comment | added | TimR | @NuclearHoagie "A whole host" is a grotesque exaggeration. The term footprint refers to presence and the statement being made identifies the kind of presence. That's how language works. There isn't a separate word for everything under the sun. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 17:03 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | @TimR Exactly, my point is that this term refers to a whole host of other aspects of a business beyond its physical size, which seems to be the only aspect the OP wants to capture. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 16:59 | comment | added | TimR | @NuclearHoagie The word has been used for over 10 years now in business-oriented journals, newspapers, and online organs (Wall Street Journal, MIT.edu, BusinessWire, for example) to include both increased market presence and increased physical plant/manufacturing capability. If a person reads business news they will have no problem understanding it, and I assume OP's target audience is comprised of such readers. His sample sentence suggests as much. Who else would be interested in a company's physical plant expansion? | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 15:37 | comment | added | Nuclear Hoagie | Without further context, "footprint" will likely be interpreted as figurative, not literal - as the example suggests, a company's footprint consists of their general impact on the workforce, economy, and society. I would not take it in the literal sense of increasing the square footage of the company's real estate - a company can increase its footprint by expanding into new markets or hiring more people with no change whatsoever to the physical size of the workplace. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:28 | history | edited | TimR | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 253 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:23 | history | edited | TimR | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 253 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:22 | comment | added | TimR | Without the word environmental it wont confuse anyone but the easily confused. It is a very common usage, especially in business expansion contexts, which is OP's context. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:22 | comment | added | Laurel♦ | @TimR That's something to put in the post itself, though you're not going to convince me that it's not confusing. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:21 | comment | added | TimR | Dictionaries are "lagging indicators", as we say. The word has to exist before the editors of the dictionary recognize it. The dictionaries don't confer existence upon the word, merely recognition. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 14:17 | comment | added | TimR | @Laurel You didn't look very hard, especially given your emphatic "This doesn't work." google.com/… | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 13:21 | comment | added | psmears | @Laurel: I think it can work - eg it can mean the shape on the ground that is covered by something such as a building. | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 13:03 | comment | added | Laurel♦ | This doesn't work. I've only heard "footprint" as being short for "environmental footprint" which is also the only relevant definition in my dictionary (NOAD). | |
| Sep 15, 2023 at 12:25 | history | answered | TimR | CC BY-SA 4.0 |