"It's not long away"?

[nq:1]Hi all! Is the above sentence correct to refer to an event which is due to take place in the near future? Or would "it's not far away" be used (obviously not referring to spatial distance)? Thanks in advance for shedding light.[/nq]
Neither of these is ideal. A more idiomatic way of saying this is "it won't be long" or "it won't be long now".

Katy Jennison
spamtrap: remove t

(Email Removed) (Semantico) wrote on 06 Apr 2004:
[nq:1]Hi all! Is the above sentence correct to refer to an event which is due to take place in the near future? Or would "it's not far away" be used (obviously not referring to spatial distance)? Thanks in advance for shedding light.[/nq]
You can say something like "Easter isn't far away" and be understood, but I don't think it's idiomatic

[nq:2]Hi all! Is the above sentence correct to refer to ... not referring to spatial distance)? Thanks inadvance for shedding light.[/nq]
[nq:1]Neither of these is ideal. A more idiomatic way of saying thisis "it won't be long" or "it won't be long now".[/nq]
Certainly in British English you could also say "it's not far off now"
and and be clearly understood. The "now" may well provide

[nq:1]You can say something like "Easter isn't far away" and be understood, but I don't think it's idiomatic for educated native English speakers[/nq]
Of course it is.

Mike Nitabach

[nq:2]You can say something like "Easter isn't far away" and be understood, but I don't think it's idiomatic for educated native English speakers[/nq]
[nq:1]Of course it is.[/nq]
Indeed. "far away" refers to temporal distance, if you like.

R.

Michael Nitabach (Email Removed) wrote on 06 Apr 2004:
[nq:2]You can say something like "Easter isn't far away" and be understood, but I don't think it's idiomatic for educated native English speakers[/nq]
[nq:1]Of course it is.[/nq]
Well, maybe it is. I don't know if I'd say it. I might prefer, "Easter will be here soon". But since I don't use this construction very often, I can't be

[nq:2]Of course it is.[/nq]
[nq:1]Indeed. "far away" refers to temporal distance, if you like.[/nq]
The original question (see title) was about "long away."

Hits for
"christmas isn't far away" 153
"christmas isn't far off" 47
"christmas isn't long away" 0
I'm not surprised by the zero, but I thought "far off" would outnumber "far away."

Best Donna Richoux

[nq:2]Indeed. "far away" refers to temporal distance, if you like.[/nq]
[nq:1]The original question (see title) was about "long away."[/nq]
There were three original questions marked by question marks. The one you mention was the first of these. Perhaps that makes it the original original question.
Or do we go with "original" = "new"? Has that been mentioned as a possible contronym in

[nq:1]The original question (see title) was about "long away." Hits for "christmas isn't far away" 153 "christmas isn't far off" 47 "christmas isn't long away" 0 I'm not surprised by the zero, but I thought "far off" would outnumber "far away."[/nq]
"isn't long away" on its own gets 14, of which nearly all refer to 'temporal distance'
"not long away" gets 416, and against most seem to be u