 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / April 2010Namely
Hello: Is "namely" closer to an exclusive enumeration/listing, allowing the set mentioned before it to contain the items listed after it but not something else, or to "eg" or "for example," which, IMO, allow me to think that the overall set contains other elements beside those listed after them? I'm thinking the former, that's why say in: ---- I work well in groups. This is due to my friendly nature and my exposure to team environments throughout my life—namely, competitive sports teams and group projects at University. ---- I think that "namely" might be too limiting/modest in describing one's accomplishments. --- Thanks. Marius Hancu > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Thanks. > Marius Hancu I agree with you; 'namely' is a bit restrictive in that context.  SignatureCheryl > Hello: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > accomplishments. > --- He's not listing accomplishments there, he's trying to explain which "team environments" in his life have caused this result. There were two. Sport teams and university projects. He is ruling out other group experiences as being *causal* factors. If that's not what he meant, he should have said "such as" or "in particular" or something else. So I go for your first option. "Namely" gives a synonym or complete set, not a random example. SignatureBest -- Donna Richoux Donna Richoux: > He's not listing accomplishments there, he's trying to explain which > "team environments" in his life have caused this result. There were two. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > So I go for your first option. "Namely" gives a synonym or complete set, > not a random example. Agreed. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto | "Don't let it drive you crazy... msb@vex.net | Leave the driving to us!" --Wayne & Shuster >Donna Richoux: >> He's not listing accomplishments there, he's trying to explain which [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> So I go for your first option. "Namely" gives a synonym or complete set, >> not a random example. Agreed. What he *said* was that there were exactly two such environments. I think it is very likely that that's not what he *meant* to say. Katy On Apr 29, 1:18 pm, k...@cam.ac.uk wrote: > >Donna Richoux: > >> He's not listing accomplishments there, he's trying to explain which > >> "team environments" in his life have caused this result. There were two. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Agreed. What he *said* was that there were exactly two such environments. I > think it is very likely that that's not what he *meant* to say. Thank you all. Marius Hancu >On Apr 29, 1:18 pm, k...@cam.ac.uk wrote: >> >Donna Richoux: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Thank you all. It crops up frequently in US trademark registrations, where it is necessary to specify the precise goods and services for which a mark is used and registered. The international system of classifying goods and services has evolved so that each numbered class has a standard form of wording as a class heading, within which are many particular goods or services. The registrant wants to specify the class heading, for broad protection, but the US Patent and Trademark Office wants the goods or services particularised. So you get this kind of compromise. It happens so frequently that I only had to look at five registrations at random -- and of course I looked at marks containing the word 'pizza', this being aue and all -- before I found an example. Trademark: GIANNI'S NY PIZZA Goods and Services: Restaurant and Hotel Services, namely, services for providing food and drink; temporary accommodations for consumers. Restaurant and Hotel Services represent the broad class, and what follows 'namely' are the real services. The hope is that a competitor using a similar mark within the hotel and restaurant industries but not in the food, drink or temporary accommodation sectors will the more easily be nabbed as a result of the first five words. Juries are fickle, dontcha know. SignaturePaul |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.