Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Temporary Abeyance Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of shufitz
posted
Today's Wall Street Journal:
"These columns have been out front in documenting Mr. Koskinen’s failures after he promised to clean up the IRS following its political targeting of conservative nonprofits. Mr. Koskinen has failed to be candid with Congress and defied subpoenas. Documents requested by Congress were destroyed on his watch. He’s done nothing to reform the agency and he has supported a new draft regulation, now in temporary abeyance, that would reinforce the agency’s political vetting."

"temporary abeyance": is there any other kind of abeyance?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: shufitz,
 
Posts: 2603 | Location: Chicago, IL USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes, if you also say things like "VIN number" or "PIN number."

You've been hiding too long, Shu!
 
Posts: 4445 | Location: In a cornfield in central IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Proofreader
posted Hide Post
It's like the River Rio Grande.


Give a man a fish and he can eat for one day; give a man a fishing pole and he will find an excuse to never work again.
Nollidj is power.
 
Posts: 6002 | Location: Rhode IslandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
I think temporary is redundant. It's much like irregardless - the "ir" is redundant.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of zmježd
posted Hide Post
I have often noticed that legal parlance uses lots of tautologies in its texts: e.g., last will and testament, cease and desist, assault and battery, etc. What's the difference between this and deprecated pleonasms such as ATM machine or PIN number? A rhetorical device for emphasis?

How does this compare if Shakespeare's "most unkindest cut of all"?

As for neologisms like irregardless, when does the distaste they cause in a person's mouth expire? When did nice cease and desist its "silly" meaning and become more positive? [Hint: some time after the 17th century.]

To my (admittedly descriptivist) mind's eye, by the time people start complaining about something it's too late to reverse the inevitable change of the language.

[Edited to correct typo.]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: zmježd,


Ceci n'est pas un seing.
 
Posts: 5085 | Location: R'lyehReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Good to see you here again, Z!

Perhaps the issue is that some don't see some of these terms every day, so when they do it's jarring despite their ignoring the peculiarity of the ones they're used to.

Shu can correct me if I'm (probably) wrong, but legal redundancies seem to be a "cover your ass" sort of speech, reducing the possibility of ambiguity.
 
Posts: 4445 | Location: In a cornfield in central IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
Abeyance usually refers to a short time period, true, but not necessarily. For example, the title of Baron Camoys was called out of abeyance after 413 years. Hardly a short time and difficult to describe as temporary! See Wikipedia.


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10930 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Good point, arnie. Ah - nice to see you again, z, and you are bringing us back to reality. I think there is a difference, though, from not preferring a particular word or phrase - and calling it "wrong." As for irregardless, clearly the "ir" and "less" are redundant, thus my dislike of the word. I know it's not wrong because it is, after all, in the OED. Not my favorite though. Good point about Shakespeare - that phrase definitely has a ring to it.
 
Posts: 23298 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright © 2002-12