"some" [measurement] is not editorial
Hi Seananony, I notice that you have just deleted the little word "some" in both Galadriel and Homo naledi, two very different articles. This leads me to imagine that a) you may well have done this many times elsewhere, and intend to continue, and b) that you don't understand the word's function in the phrase "some NNN [units of measurement]". I'm therefore taking a moment to share my view of its meaning.
The phrase "some 160,000 years ago" means that the event long ago was not in 158,024 BC: nobody I hope supposes that it is that specific year (month, day) 160,000 years precisely before 2024 (December, 14th): that's obviously not the correct interpretation, not least because the phrase was probably written a few years ago. No, the antique event was some NNN years ago, where NNN is a round number, and the description will still be correct in say 50 years' time, the small difference is a rounding error of no significance. "Some", in other words, gently indicates to the reader that the number is a rough estimate.
Your edit comment on Homo naledi indicated that you thought "some" was editorial: but it wasn't, it was an essential marker that the number was not to be interpreted literally as denoting a precise year. Similarly at Galadriel, she may well have been somewhere near 2 rangar tall, but nobody in their right mind supposes that she was 2.000 rangar in height, measured with a high-quality micrometer scale to three decimal places.
Many thanks for your attention. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk)
Hello, Chiswick Chap. I appreciate your message, but I'd advise against starting your edit descriptions, etc., with "Um." That's usually considered rude when in response to someone else.
I get that "some" is vague, but it can be used to indicate that the amount described is a lot, which often is just an opinion. I'll consider using another adjective in the future, rather than just deleting it.
Here are a couple examples I found on the web:
"Finding Bigfoot ultimately ended on May 27, 2018. The Animal Planet series finished after some 100 episodes on air with a two-hour grand finale."
"The approval came just two days after some 100 public figures, including art historians, heritage and architecture experts, intellectuals, artists, and writers signed a petition in Le Figaro and La Tribune de l’Art condemning the diocese of Paris for taking 'advantage of the restoration project.'"
Replacing "some" in the examples above with "around," "approximately," or a similar word changes the tone. (Using "some" without a number also changes the tone, and just leaves it vague:
"The approval came just two days after some public figures [objected]...")
In the Galadriel article, "some 1,800 beads" indicates that this an unusually great number of beads and "some six feet four inches" indicates that this was unusually tall. No one would care whether the number of beads was 1,799 or 1,801 and everyone would likely feel that's a lot of beads without having to be told so. Just saying "1,800 beads" is fine.
In the other edit, I agree that "around six feet four inches" is better than saying "six feet four inches" if we don't know the exact height.
Maybe we could get others' opinions in the Teahouse, or is there a better forum?
Cheers, Seananony Seananony (talk) 15:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply; never heard issues with um before, in BE the word indicates a measure of vagueness and of not wanting to be more direct than necessary, quite the opposite of what you imagine: which does indicate to me that "some" is probably also to some extent a British usage, and some of its senses may belong in that language variant and articles written in it. I don't think the Teahouse will be much use on this sort of thing. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:22, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
