| Author |
Message |
chrissy
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 2:32 pm
Post subject: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Chrissy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
John Dean
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 5:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
chrissy wrote:
| Quote: | I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
|
I believe this was the original meaning but it fell into disuse some
time ago. I'm used to 'incidence' meaning 'occurrence' in a general
sense - "The incidence of alcohol fuelled accidents ..." - and wouldn't
expect a plural.
--
John 'Not to mention the angle of refraction ...' Dean
Oxford |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700
chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) posted:
| Quote: | I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
|
You're absolutely right.
| Quote: | word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
|
I've heard it occasionally starting 5 or 10 years ago, and it's
growing. It's quite sad.
And it's hard to believe anyone who has ever read and understood the
word "incidence" would make this mistake, at least not more than once.
If they didn't understand the word, they should have looked it up in
the dictionary.
Now, most newscasters just read what's put in front of them, whether
it makes sense or not, but after they read it, they should go to the
news writer and make sure he never makes that mistake again. And the
stories that are ready before air time, they should really read in
advance, to correct these things.
s/ meirman If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 20 years
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
meirman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 10:57 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
In alt.english.usage on Sun, 26 Sep 2004 12:06:19 +0100 "John Dean"
<john-dean@frag.lineone.net> posted:
| Quote: | chrissy wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
I believe this was the original meaning but it fell into disuse some
time ago.
How about that. You're right. |
incidence \In"ci*dence\, n. [Cf. F. incidence.] 1. A falling on or
upon; an incident; an event. [Obs.] --Bp. Hall.
2.....
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA,
Inc.
Someone pointed out that the copyright year is misleading. This
edition dates from the early 20th century, he said.
Nonetheless, people aren't relying on this meaning. They're just
mixed up. For one thing, I don't think I have yet heard one of them
use "incidence" as a singular. They only use "incidences" as a
plural.
| Quote: | I'm used to 'incidence' meaning 'occurrence' in a general
|
Occurrence meaning "rate of occurrence". An occurrence can mean an
incident. But they are supposed to hire literate people to read the
news.
| Quote: | sense - "The incidence of alcohol fuelled accidents ..." - and wouldn't
expect a plural.
|
Exactly.
s/ meirman If you are emailing me please
say if you are posting the same response.
Born west of Pittsburgh Pa. 10 years
Indianapolis, 7 years
Chicago, 6 years
Brooklyn NY 12 years
Baltimore 20 years |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:29 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
| Quote: | I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
|
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
don groves
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 10:17 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
In article <415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>,
hayesmstw@hotmail.com wrote...
| Quote: | On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
|
The first gets my vote. An instance in this sense refers to an
illustration of a category, such as, "Botswana is an instance of
a country having a severe AIDS crisis".
The above is only an example sentance, whether it happens to be
true or false, I don't know.
--
dg (domain=ccwebster) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Maria Conlon
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 12:02 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
Steve Hayes wrote:
| Quote: | Chrissy brady wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't
help thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving
the word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
|
Both sound wrong to me. I would say:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is among the worst on the continent. (Or,
"The rate of occurrence of AIDS....)
(The more I read that, the less sure I am that it's OK. But I'm tired, and
maybe not thinking quite straight. Also, "Aids?" I've used "AIDS," but that
may not be the custom in South Africa.)
Maria Conlon |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddy
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 2:17 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>...
| Quote: | On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
|
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR The
worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since incidence
seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
The Nerk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Odysseus
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:52 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
Steve Hayes wrote:
| Quote: |
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I think the first is much better, but also that the rephrasings |
others have suggested would improve it. I would rather use
"incidences" to refer to two or more separate categories, as in "The
incidences of AIDS and malaria are not strongly correlated." (I have
no actual knowledge of the matter either.)
--
Odysseus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2004 5:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
On 27 Sep 2004 01:17:47 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
| Quote: | hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>...
On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR The
worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since incidence
seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
Yes. Incidence would be measured as cases per n thousand of the population. |
I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
--
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.e.u) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skitt
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 2:50 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
Peter Duncanson wrote:
| Quote: | (Freddy) wrote:
(Steve Hayes) wrote:
(chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use
this word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I
can't help thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and
deriving the word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this
is recent or something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR
The worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since
incidence seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
Yes. Incidence would be measured as cases per n thousand of the
population.
I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
|
That's the one I'd use, but I would write AIDS.
--
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Freddy
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 5:35 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
Peter Duncanson <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote in message news:<tttfl05tr8mdjqg2ve72g8aemuh1mvt1if@4ax.com>...
| Quote: | On 27 Sep 2004 01:17:47 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>...
On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR The
worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since incidence
seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
Yes. Incidence would be measured as cases per n thousand of the population.
I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
|
As with Maria (I think) "AIDS" ought to be all in caps, as it's an
acronym, though I guess ANZAC is sometimes written with only an
initial cap. What's your view?
The Nerk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Duncanson
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 6:00 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
On 27 Sep 2004 16:35:23 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
| Quote: | Peter Duncanson <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote in message news:<tttfl05tr8mdjqg2ve72g8aemuh1mvt1if@4ax.com>...
On 27 Sep 2004 01:17:47 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>...
On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR The
worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since incidence
seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
Yes. Incidence would be measured as cases per n thousand of the population.
I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
As with Maria (I think) "AIDS" ought to be all in caps, as it's an
acronym, though I guess ANZAC is sometimes written with only an
initial cap. What's your view?
I consider "AIDS" to be correct. I had copied and pasted the sentence from |
the original post, changed "worst" to "highest", but overlooked "Aids".
--
Peter Duncanson
UK (posting from a.e.u) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 10:28 am
Post subject: Re: Incidences -- Now part of the argot? |
|
|
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:25:30 +0100, Peter Duncanson <mail@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | On 27 Sep 2004 01:17:47 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
hayesmstw@hotmail.com (Steve Hayes) wrote in message news:<415771ca.287325011@news.saix.net>...
On 26 Sep 2004 01:32:53 -0700, chrissy_brady1@yahoo.com (chrissy) wrote:
I was wondering about the tendency of media commentators to use this
word where "instances" would have been entirely adequate. I can't help
thinking that people are thinking of "incidents" and deriving the
word's usage from that. Any thoughts on whether this is recent or
something that has been around for a while?
Could you give an axample?
Which would be correct:
"Botswana has one of the worst incidences of Aids on the continent."
"Botswana has one of the worst instances of Aids on the continent."
I don't know about Chrissy, but I'd probably rephrase as follows:
The incidence of AIDS in Botswana is the worst on the continent OR The
worst incidence of AIDS on the continent is in Botswana.
"Instance" here would be wrong, as it is generally synonymous with
"example".
On the other hand, one might legitimately say "there are more
instances of AIDS in Botswana than anywhere else on the continent",
but I'm not sure this would mean quite the same thing, since incidence
seems to imply rate per some benchmark figure.
Yes. Incidence would be measured as cases per n thousand of the population.
I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
|
That doesn't change the usage of "incidences", however, just the asumption
that Aids is a bad thing, which wasn't really the point of the example.
My point was that "incidences" is not necessarily an error where "instances"
should be used. I was asking the original poster to give an example of such
misuse, as I could not think of one. It's not an error I am aware of having
heard.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve Hayes
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 28, 2004 12:30 pm
Post subject: Capitals and acronyms (was: Re: Incidences -- Now part of th |
|
|
On 27 Sep 2004 16:35:23 -0700, freddy_nerk@hotmail.com (Freddy) wrote:
| Quote: | Peter Duncanson <mail@peterduncanson.net> wrote in message >> I would reword the first sentence as:
"Botswana has one of the highest incidences of Aids on the continent."
As with Maria (I think) "AIDS" ought to be all in caps, as it's an
acronym, though I guess ANZAC is sometimes written with only an
initial cap. What's your view?
|
I write HIV/Aids, because Aids is an acronym.
The tendency is to use initial caps, though the older style is to use all
caps, and the older style still is to use full stops.
A.I.D.S. --> AIDS --> Aids
N.A.T.O. --> NATO --> Nato
U.N.I.S.A. --> UNISA --> Unisa
but
BBC not Bbc
USA not Usa
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in