home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.usage.english
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!agate!ames!data.nas.nasa.gov!wk223.nas.nasa.gov!asimov
- From: asimov@wk223.nas.nasa.gov (Daniel A. Asimov)
- Subject: quite unique
- References: <1992Nov15.145943.5614@desire.wright.edu> <1992Nov16.035345.9575@Princeton.EDU> <1992Nov16.112547.22880@black.ox.ac.uk> <1992Nov16.143026.23853@news.columbia.edu> <BxuK87.176@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
- Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov (News Administrator)
- Organization: NASA Ames Research Center
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 18:10:46 GMT
- Message-ID: <1992Nov17.181046.21137@nas.nasa.gov>
- Lines: 18
-
- At the risk of merely restating what has been said already, I am moved
- to express my understanding of the "unique" situation:
-
- Something that is "unique" is indeed one of a kind.
-
- However, in most everyday contexts, like a "unique dress" or a
- "unique point of view," this one-of-a-kindness is far from a precise
- concept. In fact, in these situations, "unique" really is used to
- mean "unlike others." So regardless of the conflict with the idea
- of "one of a kind," the phrase "more unique" simply translates to
- "more unlike others," which makes perfectly good sense, IMHO.
-
- In scientific contexts, on the other hand, there would be no sense
- at all in trying, for example, to intensify "Two is the unique even
- prime number" with a comparative.
-
- --Daz
-
-