The document discusses proper word usage and avoiding ambiguity through precise language. It provides examples of how words like "avoid", "avert", and "preempt" are often misused when a more accurate word exists. Specifically, one should use "avert" rather than "avoid" when preventing a negative outcome. And "obviate" is a better choice than "avoid" for preventing something by prior action. The document urges discrimination in word choice to maintain subtle distinctions and clarity.
The document discusses proper word usage and avoiding ambiguity through precise language. It provides examples of how words like "avoid", "avert", and "preempt" are often misused when a more accurate word exists. Specifically, one should use "avert" rather than "avoid" when preventing a negative outcome. And "obviate" is a better choice than "avoid" for preventing something by prior action. The document urges discrimination in word choice to maintain subtle distinctions and clarity.
The document discusses proper word usage and avoiding ambiguity through precise language. It provides examples of how words like "avoid", "avert", and "preempt" are often misused when a more accurate word exists. Specifically, one should use "avert" rather than "avoid" when preventing a negative outcome. And "obviate" is a better choice than "avoid" for preventing something by prior action. The document urges discrimination in word choice to maintain subtle distinctions and clarity.
The document discusses proper word usage and avoiding ambiguity through precise language. It provides examples of how words like "avoid", "avert", and "preempt" are often misused when a more accurate word exists. Specifically, one should use "avert" rather than "avoid" when preventing a negative outcome. And "obviate" is a better choice than "avoid" for preventing something by prior action. The document urges discrimination in word choice to maintain subtle distinctions and clarity.
The drivers quick thinking avoided a major railway disaster.
This should read: averted a major railway disaster. To avoid something is to render it void, or o f no effect. It can also m ean to escape something or to have nothing to do w ith it. To avert is to turn away. She averted her eyes in em barrassment, we say. Thus it means to deflect something from the course it is taking and therefore to w ard off a possible devel opment. In the basic meaning of the verb avoid the overlap w ith notions o f preventing or averting is not sufficient to justify turning it into a verb virtually synonymous w ith either prevent or avert. Yet that is w hat has happened. This is not so m uch a question o f correctness or incorrect ness as of discrimination in the use of words. People w ho care for language will naturally not like to see subtle distinctions lost. W e may avoid a puddle in the road by stepping round it. W e may avoid paying income tax by various questionable means. But w here evasion is less an issue than prevention, the w ord can be used very unhappily, as in the following. We had no criticism of the cab seats, which gave enough support to avoid fatigue. As I read that, I get the image o f cab seats narrowly escaping exhaustion. Surely to prevent fatigue w ould be better. Remove each piece from the table one at a time . . . This avoids having to reconstruct the entire pattern. Here, in instructions for practising decorative decoupage, there is an excellent chance to use a now neglected w ord especially appropriate w here something is prevented by anticipatory action: This obviates having to reconstruct the entire pattern. A bad habit has lately developed o f misusing the w ord preem pt. Although it has a special intransitive use in the game of Bridge, it properly means to acquire or appropriate beforehand. Someone m ight preem pt a deal at an auction by putting in a high offer in advance. But one does not preem pt someone elses announcem ent by getting in first w ith it. That is to anticipate it. Nor can anyone preem pt the building o f a motorw ay by organizing objections to it. That is to forestall it. And again no one can preem pt some parallel claim ants case by accepting a low offer before that claim ants case comes up. That is to prejudice it.