I was brought up to use the adjective “advanced” to mean “higher in degree or ability” and the adjective “advance” to mean “earlier in time.” For example:
-he’s an advanced student.
-that’s an advanced technology.
and
-an advance copy of a book
-advance notice
-an advance screening
Lately, though, all I ever see on the 'Net is “advanced screening.”
Is this just another ugly Internet malapropism (like using “loose” for “lose”)? Or is there some style guide out there that says “advanced screening” is proper usage?
Quite the opposite. From Bryan A. Garner, Garner’s Modern American Usage (2d ed. 2003):
[quote] advanced, adj.
“Advanced” = (1) having progressed beyond most others <an advanced way of thinking>; (2) being beyond an elementary level <advanced studies> <advanced students>; (3) sophisticated <advanced weaponry>; or (4) toward the end of a span of time or distance <people who are advanced in age>.
Though it has these several meanings, “advanced” does not mean “in advance” – a meaning for which “advance,” adj., suffices. Yet writers increasingly misuse “advanced” for this sense – e.g.:[ul][li]“With this law, your landlord must give you two days’ advanced warning before entering your apartment.” Ed Sacks, “New Tenant Wants to Get Out of Nightmarish Apartment,” Chicago Sun-Times, 19 Jan. 1997, Housing §, at 7.[/li]
[li]“These are the parents who rarely give schools advanced notice of planned trips and who let their children stay home from school for minor problems.” Tamara Henry, “Skipping School for Travel,” USA Today, 27 Mar. 1997, at 10D.[/ul]In both examples, although “advance” is the intended word, it should be deleted as a redundancy.[/li][/quote]
The question was “is there some style guide out there that says ‘advanced screening’ is proper usage?” The style guide that I quoted, published this year, agrees with Wumpus that “advanced screening” is incorrect.
…which is in itself a pretty good indication that it’s wrong. The internet is renown for people righting stuff that should of been checked for grammer and word utilization.
The style guide also makes the very good point that “advance” is often redundant: after all, how else can you book if not in advance? In your case (“advance screenings”) it does serve a purpose, though.
Meh… considering the egregious error mentioned in the OP (using “advanced” when one means “advance” – and occasionally vice versa) I can’t get any more excited about that than about a phrase like “exact same thing” where the redundancy serves the purpose of emphasis. “Advance planning” emphasizes the need to plan ahead more than the unadorned “planning”, and “advance booking” even more so, as you could in theory show up and book something like a rental car on the spur of the moment. I actually think the health insurance colloquialism “pre-existing condition” is more ridiculously redundant.
There is a great difference between “an advance French grammar book” and “an advanced French grammar book”. The former is made available before general public release, the latter deals with grammar beyond elementary level. The listener unambiguously knows which is being referred to, by the choice of the “advance” form.
The redundancy often serves the purpose of clarification as well. People often say “the same thing” when it’s a similar thing, but not precisely the same. Saying “the exact same thing” insists it is indeed the same and not just similar.
Unfortunately, sometimes it is just for emphasis, as in some cases people will say “the exact same thing” when it’s not exactly the same, or even remotely similar, because sometimes people just aren’t accurate.
Redundant how? One can have a medical condition which arose after insurance was obtained and which presumable will be covered. Or one can have a condition that existed prior to obtaining coverage which presumably will not be covered. It seems to me the term “pre-existing” describes that accurately and succinctly. I don’t see any redundancy.
“Existing condition” could be misinterpreted as a condition that you have now. “Pre-existing condition” is clearly and unambiguously one that existed prior to the signing of the contract (or whatever).
It may not be correct grammar, but it serves a useful legal purpose.
The term has become so familiar and overused that it’s often used in ridiculous contexts, such as a policy not being offered or being exorbitantly priced due to “a pre-existing condition” where it clearly means nothing more than “existing condition”. Sort of like the airline “pre-boarding process” for people with children or special needs. As George Carlin once said, “what is ‘pre-boarding’? You mean you want me to board before I board?” (This would actually be a good use for the term “advance boarding”.)
Interesting difference of opinion about redundancy. I was going to say it’s too pedantic to complain of redundancy, as the usage has its purpose in communication, and it’s common for a reason. E.g. “Advance warning” suggests that warning should be well in advance, not coming at the last moment, or at a time when it’s too late to react appropriately.
Meanwhile, I’m unsure of a slightly different usage. If several military units move forward, and only some units move in advance of the others… are these “advance units,” (because they are placed “in advance” of others) or are they “advanced units” (because they have advanced, or are advanced by their commanders, in the passive sense).
I’m inclined to say “advance units”, but I’m not sure.
The English language does not demand such slavish precision. It is a language of metaphors and idioms. Such usage is not improper, except perhaps in formal writing.
