atw: Re: Usage survey: the expression "consists of"
- From: "Geoffrey" <geoffrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:05:59 +1100
Howard asks, somewhat incredulously, why I am asking this question. Well,
quite a few of my younger students tell me that they interpret “consists of” in
a non-exclusive way. I wanted to gauge the strength (or lack of strength) of
such an interpretation. Is it a another piece of transitional semantics? A fad?
Or the uncertainty of a handful of folk with a tenuous grip on conventional
semantics.
Words do change their meaning. Compare the contemporary interpretation of
“villain” with that of the eighteenth century. Or the contemporary
interpretation of “disinterested” with that of the 1980s. Meanings change, and
that is one thing that doesn’t change.
Cheers
Geoffrey Marnell
Principal Consultant
Abelard Consulting Pty Ltd
P: 03 9596 3456
M: 0419 574 668
F: 03 9596 3625
W: <http://www.abelard.com.au/> www.abelard.com.au
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Howard Silcock
Sent: Friday, 16 March 2012 3:38 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: Usage survey: the expression "consists of"
Now Geoffrey...
I hope you're going to let us in on why you're asking such a ridiculous
question! Will your next question be whether 'I went with my wife' implies that
I'm married? Yes, there may be some people who don't know what 'consists'
means, but are they likely to admit it on this list?
Howard
On 16 March 2012 15:19, Anne Casey <writan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I edited every one of my daughter's assignments for her paramedic degree, so
I'm pretty confident in saying that the drugs prescribed for the patient's
heart condition are digoxin and propranolol. There may also be other types of
therapies - for example exercise - but no other drugs _for that condition_.
/anne...
At 02:17 PM 16/03/2012, you 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 <http://www.abelard.com.au/>
Other related posts:
