William and Robert Chambers, publishers in 1872 of the first Chambers's English Dictionary |
I was but according to Mr Chambers, infer can mean imply although 'often condemned as a misuse but generally accepted for over four centuries.'
But my reading of the definitions suggests to me that infer is based on evidence and imply more on supposition. But definitely not depending on whether it's written or spoken. Now that is libel and slander. Hang on while I check which is which ... okay, so libel is written except it also includes broadcast on the radio or television. Slander is always spoken - unless you're in Scotland where slander is used for both.
Who said the English language was complicated?
Anyway tonight I'm off to cook spaghetti bolognese for thirty. I could be some time.
3 comments:
I always thought "imply versus infer" depended on the subject doing the action. YOU imply something. I infer it. As in: I infer that your statement implies I'm a so-and-so.
In Canada, we've done away with the legal distinction between libel and slander. Now both are subsumed in the generic legal term "defamation."
As in Scotland then, Debra. Makes sense. And that's an interesting take on imply versus infer too. I've just come back from circuits and my brain isn't switched on yet so I'll have to think about that later!
In my experience, "imply" refers to the action of the person presenting data while "infer" refers to the action of the person receiving those data.
Cop Car
Post a Comment