sooner than later

This is the place to post questions and discussions on usage and style. The members of the Wordwizard Clubhouse will also often be able to help you to formulate that difficult letter.

sooner than later

Post by gdwdwrkr » Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:30 am

The other evening a public radio commentator used "sooner than later" where she meant "sooner rather than later".
Such flakey shortenings don't cut it. Sure, it's easier to say, and everyone knows what you mean, but why not get it right? Taken literally, it reminds us of the order of time. But no, you have to stop and fill it in...."she means 'more likely to happen sooner rather than later'". By that time, you've missed her next revelation about the population of Dubai.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by Erik_Kowal » Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:58 am

Is this a complaint about the commentator's use of English or the expression of a more general grudge against NPR?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: -- Looking up a word? Try OneLook's metadictionary (--> definitions) and reverse dictionary (--> terms based on your definitions)8-- Contribute favourite diary entries, quotations and more here8 -- Find new postings easily with Active Topics8-- Want to research a word? Get essential tips from experienced researcher Ken Greenwald

Re: sooner than later

Post by gdwdwrkr » Thu Mar 13, 2008 11:40 am

It is a comment on an example of the dumbing-down of the language.
I appreciate the work NPR's people do, while acknowledging the slant it delivers.
Is the use of "sooner than later" accepted usage and good writing?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by hsargent » Thu Mar 13, 2008 3:06 pm

Sooner rather than later
is acceptable to me . Leaving out
rather
is the error.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: Harry Sargent

Re: sooner than later

Post by Bobinwales » Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:14 pm

Can I chuck "Sooner or later" into the equation?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: All those years gone to waist!
Bob in Wales

Re: sooner than later

Post by gdwdwrkr » Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:27 pm

Yes, but it removes the weight on the sooner side.

One further thought on "public" radio...including them in my initial reference actually implies the status at which I revere, if not their politics, their command of the language.

A cousin, for which a quick search of WW gets no results: "different than".....!
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by PhilHunt » Thu Mar 13, 2008 4:38 pm

I'm with Bob on this one.
I think the commentator simply mixed the two forms in a spooneristic way.
I see it alot in transcripts of tennis players speaking after matches.
Even the best commentators do this as they are speaking quicker than they can think.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: That which we cannot speak of, must be passed over in silence...or else tweeted.

Re: sooner than later

Post by Shelley » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:11 pm

What if you're saying:
"I'd rather have it sooner than later . . . "
Wouldn't it be, well, if not redundant, then cumbersome to add another "rather" to it:
"I'd rather have it sooner rather than later . . ."

(I'm having deja vu -- did we talk about this before?)
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by PhilHunt » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:33 pm

Substitute "I'd rather have it" for "I'd sooner have it".

I'd sooner have it now rather than later.
I'd sooner have it now than later.

The fact that I'd rather + verb may look like one rather too many doesn't make it wrong.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: That which we cannot speak of, must be passed over in silence...or else tweeted.

Re: sooner than later

Post by trolley » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:41 pm

(I'm having deja vu -- did we talk about this before?)
Do you mean sooner than now?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by Shelley » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:48 pm

Rather.
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by PhilHunt » Thu Mar 13, 2008 6:59 pm

Shelley wrote:Rather.
Is that said in a "ding dong, nurse bell" delivery?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: That which we cannot speak of, must be passed over in silence...or else tweeted.

Re: sooner than later

Post by gdwdwrkr » Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:32 pm

How about, "I'd sooner have it later"?
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by trolley » Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:44 pm

I would just as soon say "not now"
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS

Re: sooner than later

Post by John Barton » Sun Mar 16, 2008 10:16 am

Shortening or lengthening? Isn't 'sooner or later' a redundancy of 'soon or late'? As in, e.g., "Death is a black camel that, soon or late,
Will come to kneel at every gate".
ACCESS_POST_ACTIONS
Signature: John Barton, New Plymouth, New Zealand
http://www.freewebs.com/caliban5/

Post Reply