News

12 Sep 2006 10:29 am
karohemd: by LJ user gothindulgence (Balthasar)
[personal profile] karohemd

"Explosions were heard by eyewitnesses [...]"
What is wrong with this statement?

Date: 12/9/06 09:32 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] twicedead.livejournal.com
Eyewitness has evolved to become a general term for someone on the scene.

Date: 12/9/06 09:35 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tooth-fairy.livejournal.com
an eye witness should be someone that has seen something

Date: 12/9/06 09:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] faerierhona.livejournal.com
Nothing - eyewitness does not preclude the possibility of hearing. Eyewitnesses can see and hear often :-) What would be wrong is

"Explosions were heard but not seen by eyewitnesses"

Date: 12/9/06 09:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] karohemd.livejournal.com
*nods* It just sounds wrong to me.

Date: 12/9/06 09:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] faerierhona.livejournal.com
I agree - some of the stuff you hear on the news is incredibly annoying. And on signs! My (least) favourite bad sign is "This sign not in use". ARGH!!! Where do I even START on that???

Date: 12/9/06 10:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mirabehn.livejournal.com
Yesterday morning my husband and I were driving through some fairly thick fog on the A68 down from Hexham. A big sign loomed in front of us. By peering at it sufficiently we managed to make out the words:

"Warning: fog patches"

Well, quite. ;-)

Date: 12/9/06 10:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] faerierhona.livejournal.com


Should read "Warning, road ahead enters different reality - cars may perform manoeuvers impossible in your normal reality"

Date: 12/9/06 10:09 am (UTC)

Date: 12/9/06 10:20 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mazzarc.livejournal.com
That's funny :-P As a kid I always used to try to visualise how a car would actually leave those marks on the road... Never did work it out.

Date: 12/9/06 10:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gbsteve.livejournal.com
It works if the tracks don't cross and the car pretty much slips sideways, and only the front tyres leave a track.

Date: 12/9/06 11:37 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dr-wez.livejournal.com
Or "Warning, car in front may be a Transformer"

Date: 12/9/06 12:38 pm (UTC)

Date: 12/9/06 09:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gbsteve.livejournal.com
Do you think we should have earwitnesses?

"And all the nosewitnesses reported a noisome odour."

Date: 12/9/06 10:07 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] faerierhona.livejournal.com
I don't understand why "witnesses" isn't sufficient really, would make it easier

But "touchwitnesses" appeal

Date: 12/9/06 10:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] diasporal-waves.livejournal.com
There is no fullstop.

Date: 12/9/06 10:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] karohemd.livejournal.com
You didn't read the question properly. In the corner with you.

Date: 12/9/06 10:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dr-wez.livejournal.com
How about: "The explosion annihilated everyone at the scene, said one eyewitness [...]"?

Date: 12/9/06 11:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] oedipamaas49.livejournal.com
nah, they don't have to be at the scene to be an eyewitness - they could be peering from the distance.

Date: 12/9/06 11:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dr-wez.livejournal.com
"I was just bending over to kiss my ass goodbye when [...]" said one buttwitness?

Date: 12/9/06 11:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trauma-pet.livejournal.com
That's amusing

Date: 12/9/06 01:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mattp.livejournal.com
Some of them might've been blind :-)

Date: 12/9/06 03:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lslaw.livejournal.com
"Explosions were heard by eyewitnesses [...]"

Nothing is wrong with it. It makes no claim that the eyewitnesses were eyewitnesses to the thing that caused the explosions. Maybe they were just minding their own business, witnessing some eyes, when elsewhere some stuff exploded. Or, as well as seeing stuff happen they heard explosions.

There are many perfectly acceptable possibilities. We need context!

Date: 12/9/06 03:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] karohemd.livejournal.com
The context was the attack on the US Embassy in Damascus.

I assume they meant "At the time of the attack explosions were heard in the diplomatic quarter.".

Date: 12/9/06 04:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lslaw.livejournal.com
Well, you know what they say: Assume and make a broad conjecture based on the balance of likelihood.

Still, while most eyewitnesses would have heard explosions, I do take your point.

June 2025

M T W T F S S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 29 Jan 2026 09:43 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios