Pedants' Paradise

[kernelbogey]

Some local buses boast, on the back of the bus, that the service is 'up to every 7 minutes'. While I understand what is meant, the phraseology troubles me in a nagging way.

'Up to 8 per hour' would work, in that it is up from, say, 4 per hour. Whereas 'every 15 minutes' is up from 'every 7 minutes', numerically, but not in the sense intended.

Obviously what underlines the statment is You won't have to wait more than 7 minutes for a bus, at least at the busiest times.

(I think I may be late for my basket-making class - must rush.)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Obviously what underlines the statement is You won't have to wait more than 7 minutes for a bus, at least at the busiest times.

Yes - with the missed out bit "but at the time you're waiting, there won't be one for another three hours"!

(We have the same adverts round here - essentially meaningless, but looking good.)

[kernelbogey]

Yes - with the missed out bit "but at the time you're waiting, there won't be one for another three hours"!...

...when you'll have a choice of three!

[gurnemanz]

Similar to "up to" with frequency is "from" with prices. To stay with buses, on the motorway you often come up behind a Megabus displaying this sign (likeness of cheery driver image to comedian Dara O Briain is purely coincidental)

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I recently had a hospital appointment which I was warned would take "up to four hours"; it took 40 minutes. It's not inaccurate, of course - in the same way that I have "up to £7000000 in my bank account


The Megabus "from" doesn't suggest the extra costs involved in using their services - such as the complete loss of any will to live.

[LMcD]

Some local buses boast, on the back of the bus, that the service is 'up to every 7 minutes'. While I understand what is meant, the phraseology troubles me in a nagging way.

'Up to 8 per hour' would work, in that it is up from, say, 4 per hour. Whereas 'every 15 minutes' is up from 'every 7 minutes', numerically, but not in the sense intended.

Obviously what underlines the statment is You won't have to wait more than 7 minutes for a bus, at least at the busiest times.

(I think I may be late for my basket-making class - must rush.)

We have up to 4 buses an hour to the county town, comprising 3 different services that each run every 20 minutes plus a 4th that runs every 2 hours.

[Serial_Apologist]

We have up to 4 buses an hour to the county town, comprising 3 different services that each run every 20 minutes plus a 4th that runs every 2 hours.

There's an implied "any number" missing after the word "have" here.

[french frank]

Two phrases which were new to me a few months ago keep seeming to crop up (American?). 'Double down' and 'push back'. Maybe dum-Trump (between pre-Trump and post-Trump) I'm reading more American newspaper and magazine articles. Are they catching on here?

[Richard Tarleton]

Two phrases which were new to me a few months ago keep seeming to crop up (American?). 'Double down' and 'push back'. Maybe dum-Trump (between pre-Trump and post-Trump) I'm reading more American newspaper and magazine articles. Are they catching on here?

"Push-back" was quite common in the workplace (mine at any rate) well before I retired - e.g. with new policies suggested by the centre which people on the ground were less than enthralled by. "Double-down" I guess is more American, and often heard in connection with you-know-who.

[french frank]

"Push-back" was quite common in the workplace (mine at any rate) well before I retired - e.g. with new policies suggested by the centre which people on the ground were less than enthralled by. "Double-down" I guess is more American, and often heard in connection with you-know-who.

OED says:"orig. and chiefly U.S. Resistance, disagreement; adverse reaction, negative feedback." The two earliest examples, 1979 and 1984, explain the meaning of the phrase, so I suppose that's about the time it arrived in the UK.

Double down is defined as a term from pontoon or blackjack:

'in extended use: to engage in risky behaviour, esp. when one is already in a dangerous situation' which isn't quite what understood.The final example is the only one illustrating the 'extended use':

2001 N.Y. Times Mag. 10 June 77/3 Far from admitting defeat, Middelhoff is effectively doubling down. In February, he managed to persuade Mohn..to agree to sell a quarter of the company to the public.

[vinteuil]

.

... nothing to object to here - but I was tickled by a title on the BBC news website which nicely demonstrated the ability of the English language to use words as nouns or verbs, in a story about how a hawk is to patrol Waterloo station in a bid to stop pigeons pinching passengers' food - "Station hawk eyes sandwich thief pigeons"

.

[Serial_Apologist]

Where has this word "recuse" come from just recently? I heard it this morning in a report about Trump's sacking of his chief adviser, who (I think, from what I could make out) was described as having "recused" something or other. No explanation given, and it's a new word on me. Or am I not hearing right?

[vinteuil]

.

recuse in its current sense is relatively new - but it's a useful term : I don't think there's a convenient alternative -

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/recuse

.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/recuse

.

[Bryn]

Where has this word "recuse" come from just recently? I heard it this morning in a report about Trump's sacking of his chief adviser, who (I think, from what I could make out) was described as having "recused" something or other. No explanation given, and it's a new word on me. Or am I not hearing right?

In this case, the legal eagle recused (denied his own right to officiate, due to a potential conflict of interest) himself, which upset his master who is said to have wanted the investigation tamed.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Where has this word "recuse" come from just recently? I heard it this morning in a report about Trump's sacking of his chief adviser, who (I think, from what I could make out) was described as having "recused" something or other. No explanation given, and it's a new word on me. Or am I not hearing right?

North American legal language dating from the early 19th Century (accordin' to "Dictionary.com") - means "challenge (a judge or juror) as unqualified to perform legal duties because of a potential conflict of interest or lack of impartiality. (he was recused when he referred to the corporation as ‘a bunch of villains')

(of a judge) excuse oneself from a case because of a potential conflict of interest or lack of impartiality. (it was the right of counsel to ask a judge to recuse himself from continuing to hear a case because of bias)."

(I don't recall encountering it before this week, either.)