| | Although the meaning of the above quotation is clear from the context, an ambiguity in the wording struck me as worth commenting on.
Take the clause, ". . . he feared he might die without treatment in the U.S." Does it mean, "he feared he might die without treatment . . . in the U.S." Or: "he feared he might die . . . without treatment in the U.S." The first means, "he feared that in the U.S., he might die without treatment."; the second, "he feared that without treatment in the U.S., he might die." These two sentences carry quite different -- indeed virtually opposite -- meanings, which illustrates the importance of spotting potential ambiguities in one's statements and of of making clear their meaning.
In this particular case, the entire statement tells one which meaning the writer intended, but there are cases in which the context might not clarify the ambiguity. If the sentence simply said, "The man feared he might die without treatment in the U.S.," the intended meaning would not be obvious. It could mean either of the two interpretations cited above, and could therefore present a potential confusion.
I make this point, because I sometimes see ambiguous writing which can pose a problem for the reader's interpretation. Something to watch out for.
- Bill
|
|
The man told a newspaper he took the first flight from Atlanta to Europe for his wedding, then the second flight home because he feared he might die without treatment in the U.S.
