Grammar Question.
- Thread starter Dandred
- Start date
Idaho
blah blah blah
Rank means to give an abstract rating of something relative to other things. You can rank on importance to you, which ends up meaning something quite similar to prioritise, but you can also rank in terms of anything (height, stickiness, pleasant fragrance, etc). Prioritise carries with it the meaning of importance to you, and your subsequent focus and intention, which rank does not.
E2A - I don't think a possessive pronoun really makes much difference.
E2A - I don't think a possessive pronoun really makes much difference.
Last edited:
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
To rank, the verb in which assigning position is done, implies more than two items being assigned position. Furthermore, the reason for the ranking still has to be given. To prioritize, in this context, means to assign priority, so the verb already contains the reason for the positioning: urgency, importance. To rank the relative urgency or importance of three or more items has a word that carries all that meaning: prioritize. To choose between two items for relative urgency or importance also has a word that carries all of that meaning: prioritize.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I said all that with confidence, but in not so sure now. Maybe it’s just because it isn’t said.
I think it does though, if I changed the sentence to "Employees should be given the opportunity to rank their family over work." It seems more acceptable. Even though it doesn't quite seen right to me.
It is from an English teaching book.
I just want to be confident in why it is the wrong answer.
I'm well aware of what they mean, what I'm actually asking is why rank doesn't work in the example given.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Surely prioritize implies required action.
Ranking is just passive.
In your example, any normal company (except I fear you're in Korea?) might expect an employee to rank their family above work. It's just a list. But to be given the opportunity (by the company) to prioritize family over work implies action, when necessary.
Ranking is just passive.
In your example, any normal company (except I fear you're in Korea?) might expect an employee to rank their family above work. It's just a list. But to be given the opportunity (by the company) to prioritize family over work implies action, when necessary.
Last edited:
WouldBe
Dislicksick
That's what I was about to say.
You can rank a list of films in order of preference but don't have to watch the top ranking film. They don't even need to be films you'd want to watch.
It's from a book published by Oxford, called New English File Advanced Plus.
That was my gut feeling.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Ranking implies putting uptown top.
I like that explanation, but is ranking really passive, it is subjective and requires the action of thought, two people might not rank the same thing in order but they have both gone through the same active process of thinking about it.
See me in my heels and tings?
This.
And besides, 'rank' just sounds wrong in your OP.
(I know, that's not very helpful but...
)planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
It's something that requires more than thought. It requires putting thinking into being, abstract into reality, usually by conscious action. Practical, usually physical actions and reactions that have consequences.
A bit more than the action of thought, which is easily deemed passive in comparison.
Rank is an order of importance.
Prioritize is an order of importance to do.
Last edited:
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
Fuck this is playing on my mind now, sodding semantics.
OK. You can rank activities just as you can rank anything, eg 'how do you enjoy spending your time, rank the following in order of preference:
But on any specific day you'd prioritize these based on some criterion or other, but that might not be in order of how much you generally enjoy each one (ie. the ranking and the prioritization might differ)
Dandred Feel free to quote this explanation verbatim in class
OK. You can rank activities just as you can rank anything, eg 'how do you enjoy spending your time, rank the following in order of preference:
- working
- gaming
- eating
- masturbating
- being high on drugs
- watching TV
But on any specific day you'd prioritize these based on some criterion or other, but that might not be in order of how much you generally enjoy each one (ie. the ranking and the prioritization might differ)
Dandred Feel free to quote this explanation verbatim in class
This is good.
Kind of like the difference between decline and decrease, one has value, the other an numerical value.
It's only a small class, but when I can't explain something to myself I get annoyed.Fuck this is playing on my mind now, sodding semantics.
OK. You can rank activities just as you can rank anything, eg 'how do you enjoy spending your time, rank the following in order of preference:
- working
- gaming
- eating
- masturbating
- being high on drugs
- watching TV
But on any specific day you'd prioritize these based on some criterion or other, but that might not be in order of how much you generally enjoy each one (ie. the ranking and the prioritization might differ)
Dandred Feel free to quote this explanation verbatim in class
You just contradicted the right answer in the question.
I'm not asking for the definitions of the terms, I am specifically asking why one is wrong.
Like a rule, or a common usage which can be explained.
I like this explanation.
petee
no gods, no malarkey
'prior' is a Latin comparative adjective. to the extent that etymologies stick to their words, even for those who don;t know the etymologies, 'prioritize' suggests a choice of two. 'rank' would suggest a choice of more than two.
mojo pixy
...שלא נמצא בשמאל
No I didn't
From definitions you can easily infer the answer you need
That's what I did
I think this is the best answer, Sorry for doubting you.
