Phrases/words that set your teeth on edge.

[P. G. Tipps]

I don't think you'd ever use the word 'dangerous', however qualified, to describe the abandoned suitcase. Picking it up would be dangerous, though.

Oh, yes, you would!

You (and others) have already insisted that the word 'danger' includes 'potential' and the addition of the latter is wholly unnecessary.

So whether there were a bomb in Bryn's luggage or not it would be, by your very own definition, 'dangerous'. If it only actually contained a smart, freshly-ironed set of M&S pyjamas and a toothbrush it also must be (by your own definition) 'dangerous', and that would still be the case (no pun intended) whether picked up or not!

[Pabmusic]

This is an interesting philosophical discussion (ie: there might not be a true answer). It is the possibility of unperceived existence (if a tree falls unnoticed in a forest, does it make a sound?). The answer, of course, is "yes".

[french frank]

I don't think you'd ever use the word 'dangerous', however qualified, to describe the abandoned suitcase. Picking it up would be dangerous, though.

We may be entering the realms of Pedantry here, but WH Auden wrote an essay on detective fiction which he called 'The Guilty Vicarage', so I suppose you could have 'The Dangerous Suitcase'. I don't think you would ever say 'The Potentially Dangerous Suitcase', though.

[ahinton]

We may be entering the realms of Pedantry here, but WH Auden wrote an essay on detective fiction which he called 'The Guilty Vicarage', so I suppose you could have 'The Dangerous Suitcase'. I don't think you would ever say 'The Potentially Dangerous Suitcase', though.

As I turned up at the church where John Ogdon was about to commence recording of Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum back in 1985, I saw John alighting from a taxi carrying a battered old suitcase but as soon as he walked towards the church, the suitcase burst open and its contents were strewn over the ground so naturally I rushed to help the bemused pianist gather them up (this was how we got introduced). Now it might be argued that the case was "potentially dangerous" by virtue of its ropey condition and the sheer weight of its contents, but then others might counter such an argument by describing it as an "actually dangerous suitcase" given the nature of those contents! Quite where our resident Tippster might stand on this I know not, but no doubt he will tell us!...

[P. G. Tipps]

As I turned up at the church where John Ogdon was about to commence recording of Sorabji's Opus Clavicembalisticum back in 1985, I saw John alighting from a taxi carrying a battered old suitcase but as soon as he walked towards the church, the suitcase burst open and its contents were strewn over the ground so naturally I rushed to help the bemused pianist gather them up (this was how we got introduced). Now it might be argued that the case was "potentially dangerous" by virtue of its ropey condition and the sheer weight of its contents, but then others might counter such an argument by describing it as an "actually dangerous suitcase" given the nature of those contents! Quite where our resident Tippster might stand on this I know not, but no doubt he will tell us!...

We all already know where I and other members 'stand' on the matter, ahinton, and when you were introduced to poor John I would suggest his suitcase might have been more accurately described as ''not fit for purpose' (now there's a teeth-jarring phrase!) rather than 'dangerous'.

You, however, appear to be perched rather comfortably and smugly on the fence regarding 'potential danger' ... ?

[gradus]

'Story-line'.

[jean]

Do you prefer 'narrative'?

[gradus]

Why the line, story suffices.

[jean]

...his suitcase might have been more accurately described as ''not fit for purpose' (now there's a teeth-jarring phrase!)...

Which encapsulates the desired meaning like no other, in spite of what it my do to your teeth.

[ahinton]

We all already know where I and other members 'stand' on the matter, ahinton, and when you were introduced to poor John I would suggest his suitcase might have been more accurately described as ''not fit for purpose' (now there's a teeth-jarring phrase!) rather than 'dangerous'.

John and I introduced ourselves to one another at that particular moment rather than our being introduced to one another by a third party but that's neither here nor there in the present context, I think; I see no reason to perceive a conflict of any kind between the suitcase in question being unfit for purpose and potentially dangerous, given that, had a gale or stronger wind been blowing at the time, some of the material might have been lost at that crucial moment and the danger would have been defined by such a circumstance (which fortunately did not pertain); in other words, I see no reason why the suitcase could not have been both potentially dangerous and unfit for purpose and, indeed, it could well be argued that it was the former purely by virtue of being the latter.

Why "not fit for purpose" or "unfit for purpose" would jar with you I have less than no idea; how else would you seek clearly and unequivocally to identify that an item was not fit for the purpose for which it had been manufactured?

You, however, appear to be perched rather comfortably and smugly on the fence regarding 'potential danger' ... ?

Not at all. For one thing, I can see that, in certain circumstances, something might represent a potential danger (i.e. one which might or might not arise due to certain factors) while others might represent an actual danger (i.e. one where dangerous consequence is either inevitable or at the very lesat identifiably far greater); for another, I make it my business never to sit on fences because to do so would almost certainly cause physical discomfort and, who knows, it might also be potentially or actually dangerous...

[ahinton]

Which encapsulates the desired meaning like no other, in spite of what it my do to your teeth.

Perhaps he has a dentist who is either potentially or actually dangerous (and therefore ought to be struck off) or unfit for purpose or possibly even both; he could presumably sign up with an alternative dentist, but that would be up to him...

[jean]

You (and others) have already insisted that the word 'danger' includes 'potential' and the addition of the latter is wholly unnecessary.

Yes.

So whether there were a bomb in Bryn's luggage or not it would be, by your very own definition, 'dangerous'.

No. If it was a fine, well-formed, fit-for-purpose suitcase dangerous only by virtue of what it might contain (of which I had no knowledge), I would not use either dangerous or potentially dangerous to describe it.

If however it was, like John Ogden's, manifestly about to fall apart, I might call it dangerous, though it would only be so to the immediate bystanders.

.

[gurnemanz]

We may be entering the realms of Pedantry here

Alternatively: We may be in danger of entering the realms of Pedantry here.

[jean]

Neither of those. We have already entered it.

[P. G. Tipps]

Alternatively: We may be in danger of entering the realms of Pedantry here.

I would suggest that danger may well have breached the realms of both Potentiality & Pedantry some time ago ...