disclaimer inclusiveness

[Neal Whitman]

I also find it strange in those commercials when they say "X is associated with few [not "a few"] side effects, including ..."

Neal

On Nov 16, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET> wrote:

> ---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       Dave Wilton <dave at WILTON.NET>
> Subject:      Re: disclaimer inclusiveness
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'm sure those disclaimers are worded with exacting detail by armies of
> physicians, pharmacologists, and lawyers, maybe even FDA approval.
>
> I don't see any ambiguity, but "...especially those with liver problems"
> would seem to be a more elegant wording to me.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
> Victor Steinbok
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:03 PM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: disclaimer inclusiveness
>
> TV commercials for Lipitor include disclaimers that read,
>
> "Lipitor is not for everyone, including people with liver problems," etc.
>
> I find the structure fascinating. The "including" clause derives from
> "not for everyone", not from "everyone"--that is, the included people
> are the ones for whom Lipitor is not advised (i.e., those for whom it is
> NOT include people with liver problems). I am not convinced this is the
> plain reading of that sentence. Dare I raise the specter of "ambiguity"?
> (without getting AZ to slap me down...)
>
> But the whole structure seems to be mal-formed. Even if we take "not for
> everyone" to be a category, the following inclusion would still apply to
> that category--which describes those whore are NOT exempted from the
> group. But the disclaimer is meant to apply specifically to those who
> are EXCLUDED, not those who are INCLUDED, making the choice of words
> difficult to swallow.
>
> But substitution does not solve the problem either:
>
> "Lipitor is not for everyone, excluding people with liver problems," etc.
>
> On the other hand, I must admit that it does sound better with the
> entire list rather than just with "people with liver problems". What's a
> copy-writer to do?
>
>     VS-)
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

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