"vet" = to consider

[James Smith]

There's a big difference between "vet" meaning "to consider" and "to carefully examine".  So which is the usage appearing in the USA?  The first example given can be read either way, but the second requires, IMO, the "carefully examine" meaning (although "thoroughly" then sounds redundant).

James D. SMITH                 |If history teaches anything
South SLC, UT                  |it is that we will be sued
jsmithjamessmith at yahoo.com     |whether we act quickly and decisively
                               |or slowly and cautiously.


--- On Sun, 8/24/08, Doug_Harris <cats22 at STNY.RR.COM> wrote:

> From: Doug_Harris <cats22 at STNY.RR.COM>
> Subject: Re: "vet" = to consider
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Date: Sunday, August 24, 2008, 8:37 PM
> Yeah, I, too, have noticed how that word, common in
> Britain, has been creeping into the American lexicon.
> And like queue, which similarly began showing up more
> frequently a few years ago, 'vet' has been defined
> only by assumption -- as per how it's used. Better, at
> that, than golfing terms (such as bogey, birdie and
> the like) that as used mean nothing to non golfers.
> dh
> ---
>
> Subject: "vet" = to consider
>
> Something or other reported by Fox News "proves that
> Hilary Clinton was
> never seriously vetted for the Vice-Presidential
> spot."
>
> Clinton has frequently been described, with more semantic
> accuracy, as the
> "most thoroughly vetted" of any current
> politician.
>
> JL
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society -
> http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org