Disaster was nearly avoided...

Question

Hello! This is a sentence that I've heard a lot. "Disaster was nearly avoided."

But what does it exactly mean? Does it mean "Disaster was avoided, but it was very close to have happened" or "Disaster was not avoided, but it was very close to have been avoided"? Both interpretations have opposite meanings!

I think it's the second case, because nearly is synonym of almost (isn't it?), and to say that something was almost done is to say that it was not done, although it was close to have been done.

But I think that -- I'm not sure -- I've heard that sentence in cases where disaster was indeed avoided. I'm considering the possibility that nearly, in this case, might mean for close. If so, the sentence would have the complete opposite meaning: that disaster was avoided. When you say that something was done for close

Clive · Accepted Answer

Disaster happened. But it almost didn't.

MrGuedes · Answer

OK. Thanks, Clive. By the way, I had written more than this. I didn't stop when I said "When you say that something was done for close". My sentence was supposed to go on. I wrote more than this. Why doesn't it appear? Thanks.

Clive · Answer

I don't know.

MrGuedes · Answer

It has happened some times before... It's odd. Well, thanks, anyway.

CalifJim · Answer

MrGuedes"Disaster was nearly avoided." But what does it exactly mean?

Unfortunately, this has two meanings.

1 Disaster was almost avoided, but it was not avoided. The disaster occurred, but there were some circumstances that indicated that, except for some detail or another, it would not have occurred.

2 Disaster was just barely avoided, but it was avoided. The disaster did not occur, but there were some circumstances that could have caused it to occur.

I believe the majority of usage is as explained in 1. I would say that the usage in 2 is actually an incorrect substitution of 'nearly' for 'narrowly'. I recommend using 'narrowly', not 'nearly', for this meaning.
_______________________

Here are some links to examples of usage 2 above. In every case 'narrowly' would have been the better word, in my opinion. Curiously, in the last example, you will note that the caption for the video says "How tragedy was nearly avoided", but the announcer correctly says the tragedy was "narrowly avoided".

In the movie, the loss of coolant accident that was nearly avoided would have ... destroyed an area of land the size of Pennsylvania.... [would have, but didn't]
http://thisweekinnuclear.com/?p=121

A columbine-type incident was nearly avoided not too long ago here in Switzerland. The guy was 16 and brought two small calibre firearms into the school with a bag full of ammo. Thankfully, the police managed to get to him before he hurt anybody.
http://www.computerforum.com/119156-teenager-tried-bomb-school-2.html

Another attack on Empress Nunnally was nearly avoided this morning as a group calling themselves 'The Imperial army of Japan' attempted to kill Empress Nunnally with a lone gunman. Luckily Zero was there and the threat was quickly neutralized. [so the attack did not occur]
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/7929481/4/Code-Geass-R3-Lelouch-the-Immortal

(Video)
http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/playlist/1805/1899790?title=broadcast_local_2

CJ

MrGuedes · Answer

OK, thanks. Yeah, I also consider it should only have one meaning. The second one is not so obvious and intuitive. "Narrowly" or "for close" would be better words for the second meaning, as "nearly" can lead to misinterpretations when out of context...

Disaster was nearly avoided...

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions