I am currently involved in a discussion in The Pit. Part of the discussion revolves around the meaning of words/phrases. However, I am wondering if my definitions are “wrong” or if his are. Therefore, I’m asking the Teeming Millions to help out. Please tell me what comes to mind when you read or what is the meaning of the following:
1 - Stray Dog
2 - Event X may have occurred
3 - There is a good chance Event X occurred
And please, don’t look for the Pit thread until after you answer. I would like unbiased answer.
Ownerless dog (possibly just loose, but I would probably say “loose dog” in that case, rather than “stray”. The two words mean the same thing, but for some reason I would use “stray” in a more permanent sense.)
somewhat ambiguous - I think I’d need context. If this were a scientific situation I’d say this means that event X can’t be ruled out. (careful statement) If this were a political situation I’d say that event X probably occurred, but no one wants to 'fess up yet. (cya statement)
1: see every above–an ownerless dog. Can also be used to refer disparagingly to a person who acts as a hanger-on or tagalong–as in, “don’t feed him, you’ll never get rid of him!”
2: X possibly occurred. The speaker’s judgment of the level of that probability is extremely dependent on context or tone. When neutral, probability is 0.5.
Interesting. Now that we have the survey, let’s add some context. If you want to play the game without context first, just don’t highlight the text below.
1) In a discussion about someone’s pet dogs who ran loose and then got shot by an unidentified person, a poster says, “While there are some circumstances under which these options [shooting dogs] would be legal, if you know that there are dangerous stray animals, talking to the appropriate authorities should be your first resort.” In this context, what would you believe the word “stray” means?
2 & 3) In the same conversation, a poster writes, “I don’t excuse the owners in this case from their responsibility – but from the facts we have here, there’s a good chance that someone out there was practicing felony-level animal cruelty, and I’m encouraging the dog’s owner to contact local law enforcement to pursue this option. Since you’re a selective reader, allow me to repeat a point I’ve already made repeatedly: Sure, the dog may have been shot legally.” In this context, what would you think “a good chance” would mean?
The argument, of course, is threefold:
When parsing sentences, must one take context into consideration?
When a word or phrase in a sentence may be defined in more than one way, should one choose the definition that renders the sentence reasonable or unreasonable?
When one believes that an opponent in a debate has misused a word, should one build one’s counter-argument around the perceived misuse of the word, or should one confront the underlying argument?
This does not, of course, even get into the issue of whether, when an opponent in an argument uses words according to professional standards and dictionary definitions, one should persist in telling the opponent that he uses the words incorrectly. I figure that’s an issue for another day.
link. I confess that I let a certain couple of people goad me further than I should have in that thread.
Before reading the context,
1: Dog without an owner. Or possibly, one that ran away or was lost by the owner.
2: There is a possibility that event X occured. If it’s in a scientific context, I’d take that to mean you can’t prove X has not occured, but there is no evidence that it has occured either. In a normal conversation, I take it to mean that the probability is not negligible (say, greater than 0.1%).
3: There is some reason to think X has happened, but no conclusive proof.
After reading the context, I stand by my above reactions. I think if someone were to claim “a good chance,” it needs to be backed by some type of circumstancial evidence.
A stray dog is a wild dog. Ownerless. A dog wandering around the neighbourhood I would call a loose dog. I might go as far as calling it a straying dog, but I wouldn’t call it a stray unless I had seen it loose many times and it looked uncared for.
We don’t know if X has occurred. 0 < p(X) < 1
The meaning of the word good here really depends on the situation. Better than usual chance, maybe? As in, “There’s a good chance it’ll rain today” meaning p(rain in Las Vegas) > .05, but p(rain in Vancouver) > .9. Significant or not worth ignoring chance? As in, “If you take that medicine with alcohol there’s a good chance you’ll be sick.” With no context, a good chance doesn’t mean anything to me. It’s like asking me what hot means.
Post-spoiler
The poster is using stray as a synonym for loose. This is assuming the poster agrees with your description of “someone’s pet”. I assume he/she would call my version of a stray ownerless or abandoned.
2 & 3. I’d guess he/she meant the chance that a felony was committed is not worth ignoring. Either the issue of the dog being “someone’s pet” is unsettled (i.e. he/she doesn’t agree that it necessarily had an owner) or the poster is acknowledging the fact that he/she doesn’t know the law but suspects one was broken. p(x) could be anything higher than 0 in the eyes of the poster, in my opinion. It’s entirely up to him/her what’s significant.