"ever/never smokers"

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

cybercypher - 30 Jan 2007 16:20 GMT

Here's a winner of a new way of saying things. I just found this in a
medical article abstract:

"However, in stratified analysis, the OGG1 S326C variant genotypes in
***ever smokers*** (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-
0.99) and ADP-ribosyltransferase (ADPRT) V762A variant genotypes in
***never smokers*** (odds ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-
0.91) conferred a significantly reduced risk." [***Emphasis added***.]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed

I might have said "ever-smoked-ers" and "ever-smoked-ers", which is
built using standard principles of word construction in English, unlike
"ever smokers" and "never smokers", though. But they're both pretty
Shar-Pei-ugly.

Signature

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
Native speaker of American English; posting from Taiwan.
"It has come to my attention that my opinions are not universally
shared." Scott Adams, The Dilbert Blog, 23 Jan 2007;
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/
teranews charges a one-time US$3.95 setup fee

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Reply to this Message

cybercypher - 30 Jan 2007 16:28 GMT

> Here's a winner of a new way of saying things. I just found this
> in a medical article abstract:
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> I might have said "ever-smoked-ers" and "ever-smoked-ers", which
> is built

Shudda bin "'ever-smoked-ers' and 'never-smoked-ers', which
are built"

> using standard principles of word construction in
> English, unlike "ever smokers" and "never smokers", though. But
> they're both pretty Shar-Pei-ugly.

Signature

Reply to this Message

Paul Wolff - 30 Jan 2007 18:05 GMT

>> Here's a winner of a new way of saying things. I just found this
>> in a medical article abstract:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>> English, unlike "ever smokers" and "never smokers", though. But
>> they're both pretty Shar-Pei-ugly.

'Ever smokers' look like people who have been smoking for a long time,
and still are, while 'ever-smoked-ers' look like people who answer the
question "Have you ever smoked?" in the affirmative.

That's not to say that 'ever smokers' can't be construed as
'ever-smoked-ers', but without a gloss in the text it's ambiguous at
best.

I don't think the hyphens or dashes make a difference to this.

Signature

Paul
In bocca al Lupo!

Reply to this Message

Don Aitken - 30 Jan 2007 19:34 GMT

>>> Here's a winner of a new way of saying things. I just found this
>>> in a medical article abstract:
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
>I don't think the hyphens or dashes make a difference to this.

The usage is an adaptation of one which has been commonplace in the
drug-abuse field for thirty years or more. Those who have ever used a
drug (even once) are its "ever users", as opposed to "occasional
users" or "regular users".

Signature

Don Aitken
Mail to the From: address is not read.
To email me, substitute "clara.co.uk" for "freeuk.com"

Reply to this Message

Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2007

"ever/never smokers"