0
Antonia Posted 21 years ago
Vocabulary
party/ side
Hello!
Is it better to talk about sides or parties in negotiation language?
For example:
Non-cooperative or competitive tactics can and usually lead to win-lose outcome, in which one side/party achieves its goals at the expense of the other which inevitably loses.
Correct me please, if you see any mistake.
Thank you
Is it better to talk about sides or parties in negotiation language?
For example:
Non-cooperative or competitive tactics can and usually lead to win-lose outcome, in which one side/party achieves its goals at the expense of the other which inevitably loses.
Correct me please, if you see any mistake.
Thank you
Top answer
I'd say party, but well... wait for someone else's advice...
- I'd say party, but well...
- wait for someone else's advice...
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
0
Thanks Pieanne!
I used party before, but now I started considering side. hm
I used party before, but now I started considering side. hm
00
"party" makes me think of insurances, looks more serious. "sides" makes me think of black or white, armed conflicts aso...
00
I agree that 'party' is a better choice: more businesslike and not so confrontational as 'side'.
00
Slightly altered:
Non-cooperative or competitive tactics can ,and usually do, lead to win-lose outcomes, in which one party achieves its goals at the expense of the other party.
'which inevitably loses' is redundant
Non-cooperative or competitive tactics can ,and usually do, lead to win-lose outcomes, in which one party achieves its goals at the expense of the other party.
'which inevitably loses' is redundant
00
Thank you Pieanne, Mr Micawber and Davkett for your answers and alternations.
0
Related Questions