[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

....
One is I praise something and then own up that I've commercial interest
The other - I praise something and then say that I don't have commercial interest

Disclaimer is used in the first instance. As per Thad, the second instance doesn't need a disclaimer

I would imagine that the first instance does not require a disclaimer at all and the second does!
Thad, hello! Anybody home?

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by anupmathur

I would imagine that the first instance does not require a disclaimer at all and the second does!
Thad, hello! Anybody home?

Oh no no! I am clear about the first instance. I put up a disclaimer when I have a commercial interest or any kind of interest, because i am an involved party. Else it becomes crookedness. I write a blog about an excellent service & food at a hotel, and recommend that as a must visit place - finally someone finds out that I actually own the set-up

The question is in the second case, where I am just a third person, an observer

[Guite]

First instance, yes.

Second instance, depends. If you wax too eloquently about a product / service, you run the risk of people not believing you on suspicion that you have vested interest in it. Declaring that you have no ulterior motive in making your statement puts you in good stead. Just my opinion.

[noopster]

^^ You may not have a direct commercial interest in the product per se but if there is in any way that your judgement can be compromised before or during the writing process, that should be declared as a disclaimer. For example if a car manufacturer pays for tickets, hotel rooms and other expenses to make a car available to us for review, we state that up front in the review as a disclaimer. I have also heard the word disclosure used in similar context.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by Samurai

But I never heard of "how many ever times", not sure it is correct.

It is not, it doesn't make sense.

And you're not not sure. You mean you don't think it is correct, and I suspect you are very sure!

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

Would 'Disclosure' be a better word in that context?

Originally Posted by anupmathur

And that is exactly what 'disclaimer' does in this instance.
It is the correct and widely accepted word to covey that there is no vested interest or similar motive.

'Disclosure' would be incorrect to convey this sense, or the legal implications.

I like Disclosure. I think it is the better word, but I am not sure (really!)

Originally Posted by anupmathur

Thad, hello! Anybody home?

Home, alive and well, but somehow missed a bunch of posts. Maybe I just couldn't able to see them

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

.....
Maybe I just couldn't able to see them

Hmm, I see that English as she is wrote can be quite different from English as she is spoke!

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

And you're not not sure. You mean you don't think it is correct, and I suspect you are very sure!

You are right, I am not sure is the diplomatic equivalent of I don't think. It is something I picked up from the Americans.

[noopster]

^^ It's very interesting how speakers of the Queen's English use understatement to convey the exact opposite effect. For example, "I'm not sure that's such a good idea" translates to "I think that's a terrible idea". It can cause misunderstandings when the person addressed is not familiar with colloquial usage. Many years ago, I offended a colleague with my one-liner admiring reply to something he had sent for review: "Not bad at all". He replied indignantly that he had asked if it was good, and not if it was bad!

[vb-saan]

Originally Posted by noopster

Many years ago, I offended a colleague with my one-liner admiring reply to something he had sent for review: "Not bad at all". He replied indignantly that he had asked if it was good, and not if it was bad!

This was from your Singapore days? Here they always use Not bad, instead of saying good

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by noopster

I offended a colleague with my one-liner admiring reply to something he had sent for review: "Not bad at all". He replied indignantly that he had asked if it was good, and not if it was bad!

But is 'not bad at all' a compliment? I thought it is used whenever you want to covey an above average result or in a situation like "not bad at all for a first timer'

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

But is 'not bad at all' a compliment? ....

Yes, it is.
It expresses surprise and admiration for the very good (and unexpected?) outcome.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by anupmathur

Yes, it is.
It expresses surprise and admiration for the very good (and unexpected?) outcome.

So should the recipient be happy about the admiration or sad about the surprise?

[anupmathur]

Originally Posted by carboy

So should the recipient be happy about the admiration or sad about the surprise?

Essentially, happy enough to give you a big hug!

[vnabhi]

Originally Posted by noopster

^^ It's very interesting how speakers of the Queen's English use understatement to convey the exact opposite effect. For example, "I'm not sure that's such a good idea" translates to "I think that's a terrible idea". It can cause misunderstandings when the person addressed is not familiar with colloquial usage. Many years ago, I offended a colleague with my one-liner admiring reply to something he had sent for review: "Not bad at all". He replied indignantly that he had asked if it was good, and not if it was bad!

Good observation, @noopster. I'd made a mention of this in post # 1319 on page 88.

[thoma]

Something similar. My project manager had given me instructions not use the word 'doubt' in any communications with American clients. 'I have a doubt' translates to more of 'I am doubting'. Instead, we were told to use 'I would like to get a clarification' or 'could you please clarify' or even 'I have a clarification'!