Timeline for Is it idiomatic to apply a false title to inanimate things?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 hours ago | comment | added | ashamed | @TinfoilHat I would like to know your answer to the question as a supporter of false titles (since the two answers are in the position against false titles themselves and I would like to know answers from different perspectives of views.) | |
| 13 hours ago | comment | added | LPH | @Xanne However, using this negation in the second part makes clear that what is not usually an associated phenomenon (spreading to another type) could be the case. In other words you should NOT believe that this phrase implies that the practice did NOT make an inroad into another type (in fact, it did). (2/2) | |
| 13 hours ago | comment | added | LPH | @Xanne I don't know how to convince you that the writer of this answer is a machine fully made of bone and flesh (all human), but perhaps I will convince you that there is not in its last paragraph one negation too many; if you said "does NOT mean that the practice … has made an inroad …", it would make sense, but trivially, since the expression carries in itself no such implication; if you said "means that the practice … has NOT YET made an inroad …" you would be wrong because this can obviously happen; the extra negation would then have to be the second one. (1/2) | |
| 18 hours ago | comment | added | Xanne | The last paragraph of this answer has an extra negative and is very odd. Really the work of a human being? | |
| 19 hours ago | comment | added | Tinfoil Hat | “probably not recommendable”? I’d say the “false title” is fully recommendable — I concur with usage writer William Safire when he states, “The article ‘the’ gives the title excessive emphasis and that it sounds strange to American speakers.” | |
| 23 hours ago | comment | added | Řídící | @R.M. That's the kind of nuance that I was thinking of. Maybe "the" wasn't omitted. Maybe "a" wasn't omitted. Maybe "" can mean something else than either "the" or "a". | |
| 23 hours ago | comment | added | R.M. | @Řídící As a native English speaker, I don't read "the financial expert Tom Timber" or "Tom Timber, the financial expert" as expressing any uniqueness regarding Tom Timber with respect to the class of financial experts. (That is, there's no claim that he's "the" financial expert.) The definite article is merely indicating (assumed) pre-existing familiarity (e.g. "Tom Timber ... you know of him, right? The Tom Timber who is somewhat famous as a financial expert?"). -- "Tom Timber, a financial expert" would be used in contexts where the writer assumed you didn't already know about him. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Řídící | Your example is interesting, I think. Tom Timber is "a financial expert" or "financial expert", not "the" financial expert. "Tom Timber, financial expert" is not the same as "Tom Timber, a financial expert" is not the same as "Tom Timber, the financial expert". I don't know where I want to go with this thought. :) | |
| yesterday | history | answered | LPH | CC BY-SA 4.0 |