atw: Re: Usage survey: the expression "consists of"
- From: Michael Lewis <michael.lewis@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 14:26:29 +1100
"Consist of" implies "this and only this" to me; not synonymous with
"include".
- Michael
On 16 March 2012 14:17, Geoffrey <geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi austechies****
>
> ** **
>
> Can I get your feedback on how you interpret the expression “consists of”
> or “consisted of”. In the following example:****
>
> ** **
>
> “Drug therapy consisted of 0.25 mg of digoxin per day and 40 mg of
> propranolol twice a day.”****
>
> ** **
>
> do you read that as saying that the entire therapy included just digoxin
> and propranolol *and nothing else*? Or do you read it as saying that the
> therapy included digoxin and propranolol *and possibly something else*? *
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> Don’t worry about what might or might not be *correct* (whatever that
> means). The issue is how you interpret “consisted of”: as giving the full
> set of items or a sub-set of items.****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers****
>
> ** **
>
> Geoffrey Marnell****
>
> Principal Consultant****
>
> Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd ****
>
> P: 03 9596 3456****
>
> M: 0419 574 668****
>
> F: 03 9596 3625****
>
> W: www.abelard.com.au****
>
> ** **
>
Other related posts:
