[ExI] Language Changing Before Our Very Eyes

[Lee Corbin]

Gordon writes

>> On the one hand, "near" can be a measure of distance...On the other  
>> hand, "near" can mean *almost*...
> 
> I'm glad you see the absurdity of it, Lee. :)

Not quite yet!

> My thesaurus tells me that "miss" and "collide" are antonyms.
> 
> But in the common parlance, "near miss" and "near collision" are treated  
> as synonyms!

Well, my claim is that there are *two* separate meanings of "near"
that are befuddling us, as I said.  The first "miss" that you just used
means /near as in distance/, while the second means /near as in almost/.

You and Damien don't buy my theory; but I don't see why.

Lee

> When two airplanes pass each other in the sky at close proximity moving in  
> opposite directions, was it a "near miss" or was it a "near collision"? It  
> would seem that at least one of these two possibilities should involve  
> casualties! :)
> 
> I suppose it's only a matter of opinion, but it's my opinion the language  
> cops were asleep on the day people invented the term "near miss". In other  
> words, I'd say the planes nearly collided.