"Five of Nine" equals what time?

[MotionMan]

Your link: Mentalfloss
My link: Mentalfloss
Link between links: Mentalfloss

That place is like the Buzzfeed of stupid made-up BS presented as research.

Did you even read the story about blowing on cartridges? It is self-admittedly "unscientific" and clearly is very tongue-in-cheek. Anyone who took that seriously needs to have their head examined. The fact that PBS took it seriously and ran with it is more of an indictment of PBS than Mentalfloss.

As for the article I posted, it did not purport to be a definitive research paper. Rather, it reads exactly as it intended: One person's opinion based on some obviously limited research.

In other words, no one should take MentalFloss seriously - it's intended to be entertainment. The reason I posted it is because it reminded me of this thread and I thought it was interesting.

MotionMan

 

[CZroe]

Did you even read the story about blowing on cartridges? It is self-admittedly "unscientific" and clearly is very tongue-in-cheek. Anyone who took that seriously needs to have their head examined. The fact that PBS took it seriously and ran with it is more of an indictment of PBS than Mentalfloss.



As for the article I posted, it did not purport to be a definitive research paper. Rather, it reads exactly as it intended: One person's opinion based on some obviously limited research.



In other words, no one should take MentalFloss seriously - it's intended to be entertainment. The reason I posted it is because it reminded me of this thread and I thought it was interesting.



MotionMan

Yes, I did, but it becomes a lie when he reaches a conclusion that "all signs point to no: blowing in the cartridge did not help." It spread from there all over the Internet and is now incorrectly being used by PBS to teach science.

 

[SP33Demon]

In the Mid Atlantic (NJ/NY/PA/WV/DE/VA/MD/DC), "Quarter of" or "ten of" is a very common phrase. The article may be on to something because of the English settlers.

From wiki:

The time 8:45 is spoken as "(a) quarter to (or of, before, or til) nine".[12] Moreover, in situations where the relevant hour is obvious or has been recently mentioned, speakers can state simply "quarter to", "half past", etc., to avoid elaborate sentences in particularly informal conversations. This form is also used in television and radio broadcasts that cover multiple time zones which are at one hour intervals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12-hour_clock#Informal_speech_and_rounding_off

Hence "of" is perfectly acceptable in informal speech to communicate faster so you don't have to express the entire sentence.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

In the Mid Atlantic (NJ/NY/PA/WV/DE/VA/MD/DC), "Quarter of" or "ten of" is a very common phrase.

"Quaahtah." ()

 

[MotionMan]

Yes, I did, but it becomes a lie when he reaches a conclusion that "all signs point to no: blowing in the cartridge did not help." It spread from there all over the Internet and is now incorrectly being used by PBS to teach science.

Let's be clear about what we are talking about here:

So, dear readers, all signs point to no: blowing in the cartridge did not help. My money is on the blowing thing being a pure placebo, offering the user just another chance at getting a good connection.

That is not a "conclusion". That is a non-committal suggestion, at best.

The fact the PBS ran with it is PBS's problem, not MentalFloss's.

MotionMan

 

[Ichinisan]

In the Mid Atlantic (NJ/NY/PA/WV/DE/VA/MD/DC), "Quarter of" or "ten of" is a very common phrase. The article may be on to something because of the English settlers.

From wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12-hour_clock#Informal_speech_and_rounding_off

Hence "of" is perfectly acceptable in informal speech to communicate faster so you don't have to express the entire sentence.

It's "perfectly acceptable" to fail at communicating and be misunderstood.

The hubris of these "of" people! They simply have no idea how frequently they have been misunderstood. Ignorance is bliss...

 

[CZroe]

Let's be clear about what we are talking about here:







That is not a "conclusion". That is a non-committal suggestion, at best.



The fact the PBS ran with it is PBS's problem, not MentalFloss's.



MotionMan

It's also John Connor and Red Squirrel's problem. It's also The Fine Brother's problem with their "Kids React To..." YouTube series. It's spreading like wildfire. He even repeated it on a podcast linked to in the article and said that stacking WAS a legitimate technique for getting NES games to work even though that bends the pins even more and is ultimately damaging just like blowing. He's wrong in every way he could be wrong and the lie is still a lie: What "signs point to?" He did absolutely NO testing and EVERY SINGLE SOURCE either does not address it or directly refutes it! It's a flat-out lie, he repeated the lie, people believed the lie because he presented it in an authoritative way, and it's been spreading for years now.

 

[MotionMan]

It's also John Connor and Red Squirrel's problem. It's also The Fine Brother's problem with their "Kids React To..." YouTube series. It's spreading like wildfire. He even repeated it on a podcast linked to in the article and said that stacking WAS a legitimate technique for getting NES games to work even though that bends the pins even more and is ultimately damaging just like blowing. He's wrong in every way he could be wrong and the lie is still a lie: What "signs point to?" He did absolutely NO testing and EVERY SINGLE SOURCE either does not address it or directly refutes it! It's a flat-out lie, he repeated the lie, people believed the lie because he presented it in an authoritative way, and it's been spreading for years now.

Think the difference of opinion we have is that I don't see that article as presenting anything "in an authoritative way". Maybe people took it that way, but if you read the words (either in or out of the context of the entire article), I think one should see that it is not "authoritative" at all.

MotionMan

 

[JujuFish]

It's "perfectly acceptable" to fail at communicating and be misunderstood.

The hubris of these "of" people! They simply have no idea how frequently they have been misunderstood. Ignorance is bliss...

The irony. "Of" is even defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as "before" when referencing time, as seen in definition 11b: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

 

[Red Squirrel]

If I heard someone say that I'd figure I missunderstood and they said five nines and were talking about a server uptime SLA. That or they were playing some kind of card game. "Do you have a five of nines?" "Uhhh, go fish".

 

[SP33Demon]

The irony. "Of" is even defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as "before" when referencing time, as seen in definition 11b: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

Yup, exactly.

 

[Matthiasa]

The irony. "Of" is even defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as "before" when referencing time, as seen in definition 11b: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

Except it is never actually mentioned there... but an A for effort.

Now I know you are likely getting at:

used as a function word to indicate a whole or quantity from which a part is removed or expended

But even then it would be: X minutes of Y O'Clock and not X of Y.

At best it is broken English at worst it is simply incorrect.

 

[MotionMan]

Except it is never actually mentioned there... but an A for effort.

What do you mean?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

11
a —used as a function word to indicate the position in time of an action or occurrence <died of a Monday>
b : before <quarter of ten>

MotionMan

 

[MongGrel]

I would probably say "5 'til or to 9" myself, but would know what someone meant.

Surprised so many seem unfamiliar with the use of it personally.

 

[Matthiasa]

What do you mean?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of



MotionMan

That was not showing up on my screen. I call it bad website design. We have had a few threads on here lately.

 

[Ichinisan]

Except it is never actually mentioned there... but an A for effort.

Now I know you are likely getting at:


But even then it would be: X minutes of Y O'Clock and not X of Y.

At best it is broken English at worst it is simply incorrect.

He's talking about this one:

11
...
b : before <quarter of ten>

...which means that's the only case where "of" is used in that way and you simply cannot expect someone to know what you mean if they are unfamiliar with that usage.

 

[pmv]

In the Mid Atlantic (NJ/NY/PA/WV/DE/VA/MD/DC), "Quarter of" or "ten of" is a very common phrase. The article may be on to something because of the English settlers.

From wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12-hour_clock#Informal_speech_and_rounding_off

Hence "of" is perfectly acceptable in informal speech to communicate faster so you don't have to express the entire sentence.

Though as a British English speaker the phrase 'quarter of...' bugged me when I encountered Americans using it. Its not a contemporary British idiom (maybe it was back when the colonisers arrived). "Quarter of 10" to me means 2.5, so, er half-past-two.

Quarter _to_ ten, makes perfect sense, its surely obvious it means Quarter [of an hour] to ten?

"quarter _of_ ten" is just confusing, because a quarter of 10 is 2 and a half.

Though the wiki link above suggests there is still more confusion awaiting out there

Instead of meaning 5:30, the "half five" expression is sometimes used to mean 4:30, i.e., "half-way to five", especially in the more German-influenced parts of the U.S.A (the Midwest, essentially).

I'd never have guessed that "half five" could mean 4.30, I'd take it as meaning 5.30. If Wiki is correct I'd be constantly arriving a hour early for things in the Mid West.
(though I suppose it really should mean half of 5, so, we're back to 2.30 again!)

 

[Ichinisan]

... The article may be on to something because of the English settlers. ...

As established in this thread, almost no one in England has any idea what "5 of 9" is supposed to mean.

 

[CZroe]

Think the difference of opinion we have is that I don't see that article as presenting anything "in an authoritative way". Maybe people took it that way, but if you read the words (either in or out of the context of the entire article), I think one should see that it is not "authoritative" at all.



MotionMan

He presented it as a researched, professional, opinion supported by interviews even though the actual interviews did not support this.

The irony. "Of" is even defined in the Merriam-Webster dictionary as "before" when referencing time, as seen in definition 11b: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/of

How is that ironic? No one is questioning that it means that to some people in a certain region where they learned it. That's WHY it's in the dictionary. Using the dictionary to excuse it is circular reasoning.

Though as an British English speaker the phrase 'quarter of...' bugged me when I encountered Americans using it. Its not a contemporary British idiom (maybe it was back when the colonisers arrived). "Quarter of 10" to me means 2.5, so, er half-past-two.

Quarter _to_ ten, makes perfect sense, its surely obvious it means Quarter [of an hour] to ten?

"quarter _of_ ten" is just confusing, because a quarter of 10 is 2 and a half.

Though the wiki link above suggests there is still more confusion awaiting out there

I'd never have guessed that "half five" could mean 4.30, I'd take it as meaning 5.30. If Wiki is correct I'd be constantly arriving a hour early for things in the Mid West.
(though I suppose it really should mean half of 5, so, we're back to 2.30 again!)

Indeed. If I am 1/3rd "of" the way to my destination, I have 2/3rds remaining to go. The only context where it would mean 1/3rd of the way remains is in reference to time, which is why it requires its own line in the dictionary and would be completely misunderstood by someone unfamiliar with it. It only proves the point that it shouldn't be used when there are much more acceptable ways to say the same thing.

 

[Matthiasa]

He's talking about this one:



...which means that's the only case where "of" is used in that way and you simply cannot expect someone to know what you mean if they are unfamiliar with that usage.

Other dictionary sites indicate that as strictly being an American usage and is listed below even the informal usages of the word, which still leads to it being improper English.

 

[CZroe]

Other dictionary sites indicate that as strictly being an American usage and is listed below even the informal usages of the word, which still leads to it being improper English.

This.

 

[Ichinisan]

...which means that's the only case where "of" is used in that way and you simply cannot expect someone to know what you mean if they are unfamiliar with that usage.

...and someone who wants to communicate effectively will deliberately avoid using "of" in that way. You will be universally understood by using "to" or "'til."

 

[MotionMan]

We are not alone in our discussion:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=582853

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080329130548AA1YecD

And then there's this:

https://books.google.com/books?id=e...age&q="what time is it?" "quarter of"&f=false

MotionMan

 

[pmv]

This terminology must have caused a lot of confusion on ST Voyager.

 

[Ichinisan]

We are not alone in our discussion:

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=582853

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080329130548AA1YecD

And then there's this:

https://books.google.com/books?id=e...age&q="what time is it?" "quarter of"&f=false

MotionMan

More evidence that it's not universally understood!