|
Jul 2020
1:07pm, 2 Jul 2020
12,475 posts
|
Badger
Assuming the writer meant to be unambiguous, all elements, I think. If it was just 'and', it would obviously be all.
If it was just 'or', I think it would still be all; if you wanted to imply just the last two, it would be "are timetabled and organised or supervised by..."
I'd infer the same thing with and/or - you'd need another conjunction to imply just the final combination.
|
|
Jul 2020
2:27pm, 2 Jul 2020
11,396 posts
|
larkim
So is the "and" superfluous then whenever "and/or" is used in a listing?
"Participants must be in possession of a tomato, a pear and / or a banana"
If I turn up with a banana I'm OK. If I turn up with a banana and a tomato am I barred?
If lessons are any one of timetabled, organised or supervised, does that meet the requirement? You only need the "and" if there's a requirement for there to be two characteristics at play. And a plain reading would not say that a lesson which has all three characteristics would not be approved of?
As it's something of a legal requirement under consideration, an absence of ambiguity would be helpful. Or is it just me over-thinking it?
|
|
Jul 2020
2:40pm, 2 Jul 2020
12,478 posts
|
Badger
If it's a legal requirement, it needs to be stated unambiguously, and that list is probably not the best way to do it. Try something like:
The institution has carried out at least one (or two if that's what you want) of the following duties:
a/ timetabled the event
b/ organised the event
c/ supervised the event
And/or versus or implies to me that more than one is perfectly acceptable, where either/or might not be.
Kit list: you must have a hat or a buff to cover your head. Sensible.
Kit list: you must have a hat and/or a buff to cover your head. Why would you want both?
Kit list: you must have a map and/or a printout of the route directions. Sensible again.
Kit list: you must have either a hat or a buff to cover your head. Implies you should not have both.
|
|
Jul 2020
2:54pm, 2 Jul 2020
11,399 posts
|
larkim
I agree (not the best way), sadly I'm on the receiving end of the pseudo-legal wording rather than imposing it on others, so I would like to know if I can choose any one of three with impunity!
|
|
Jul 2020
3:01pm, 2 Jul 2020
2,849 posts
|
um
In which case larkim, "where the institution timetables, organises or supervises the event" ?
or if you want to be absolutely unambiguous, "where the institution does at least one of the event timetabling, organising or supervising actions"
|
|
Jul 2020
3:03pm, 2 Jul 2020
11,400 posts
|
larkim
As I say, what is written is written - I'm only bound by complying with whatever it means, so the meaning of the phrase (reasonably interpreted) is important, rather than being a position to propose an alternative.
UK Civil Service plain english....
|
|
Jul 2020
3:19pm, 2 Jul 2020
38,521 posts
|
LindsD
I have to say that they way I read it, it needs to be either
a. timetabled and organised OR
b. timetabled and supervised OR
c. all 3
I think timetabled is a non-negotiable, but I'm possibly wrong.
|
|
Jul 2020
3:20pm, 2 Jul 2020
11,402 posts
|
larkim
Knowing what I know, I suspect you're right in terms of the author's intentions LindsD. As usual, a few additional words would ensure utter clarity but that's nothing new...
|
|
Jul 2020
3:48pm, 2 Jul 2020
19,458 posts
|
ChrisHB
I'm wondering how different timetabling and organising are.
|
|
Jul 2020
4:00pm, 2 Jul 2020
12,479 posts
|
Badger
Frustrating, larkim. Is there anybody involved in writing it who might help clarify? (Please try not to break a rib laughing at that).
Interesting point, Chris; depends whether delegating/outsourcing the provision of the lesson completely would qualify as organising it.
|
Discovering you've been pronouncing a word wrong all your life
Jul 2024