Timeline for Free meaning “free of charge” vs “unoccupied”
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2020 at 7:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Nov 17, 2012 at 11:26 | vote | accept | kmera | ||
| Sep 23, 2012 at 13:34 | comment | added | Kris | This doesn't say if the use of "free" is ambiguous, which I think it is not. See also my comment at OP. | |
| Sep 12, 2012 at 2:29 | comment | added | J.R. | @Charles: I agree, of course. When I made my comment, I didn't think anyone would really be confused by "Is this seat taken?", but I did think it was worth pointing out that it's hard to get away from the ambiguity problem, because so many words have alternate meanings. As you said, when you get right down to it, even the O.P.'s original "Is this seat free?" question is readily understood in most contexts: in the theater, it means, "Is this seat taken?" while at the end of the driveway, it means, "Are you really giving this recliner away for nothing?" | |
| Sep 11, 2012 at 20:09 | comment | added | Charles | @J.R. I guess "in use" is less ambiguous, but no native speaker would assume "taken" means anything but "unavailable" or "spoken for" or "in use" unless they were being intentionally punny. | |
| Sep 11, 2012 at 19:07 | comment | added | dr jimbob | Is this chair available? | |
| Sep 11, 2012 at 18:48 | comment | added | J.R. | One could argue that "taken" is prone to ambiguity as well ("No, sir, I'm not taking that chair anywhere," e.g.) | |
| Sep 11, 2012 at 16:33 | comment | added | narx | This is the correct answer. +1! Isn't English fun? | |
| Sep 11, 2012 at 14:57 | history | answered | Charles | CC BY-SA 3.0 |