0
Usenet Posted 21 years ago
Usage
Patently obvious/blatantly obvious
Hi
I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding. However, "blatantly obvious" now seems to be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong!
Any thoughts?
I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding. However, "blatantly obvious" now seems to be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong!
Any thoughts?
Top answer
[nq:1]Hi I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding. However, "blatantly obvious" now seems to be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong! [/nq] 'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readily visible" of the adjective 'patent'.
- [nq:1]Hi I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding.
- However, "blatantly obvious" now seems to be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong!
- [/nq] 'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readily visible" of the adjective 'patent'.
- It wouldn't surprise me to hear that 'blatantly obvious' is supplanting it, because the word 'blatant' is current, and the phrase is therefore more understandable to those encountering it for the first time.
- I can see no reason for objecting to 'blatantly obvious' - its meaning is perfectly clear without reference to the other version.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
27 Answers
0
[nq:1]Hi I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding. However, "blatantly obvious" now seems to be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong! Any thoughts?[/nq]
'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readil
'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readil
00
I agree that the meaning is clear, and that "blatantly obvious" is an accepted idiom; but it has always sounded slightly wrong to me where what is described has no volition.
"He made it blatantly obvious that he hated me" strikes me as fine, therefore; whereas "it was blatantly obvious that the dress didn't suit her" sounds off to me because neither dress nor wearer is unsuitable deliberately.
"He made it blatantly obvious that he hated me" strikes me as fine, therefore; whereas "it was blatantly obvious that the dress didn't suit her" sounds off to me because neither dress nor wearer is unsuitable deliberately.
00
[nq:1]I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was "patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess based on mishearing/misunderstanding.[/nq]
As the two words don't sound at all similar, this is a surprising suggestion. That is, of course, they don't here*, because "patently" has a short A. I am also surprised at the suggestion that there *is a "sta
As the two words don't sound at all similar, this is a surprising suggestion. That is, of course, they don't here*, because "patently" has a short A. I am also surprised at the suggestion that there *is a "sta
00
0
[nq:1]In the UK, "blatant" rhymes with "patent", usually.[/nq]
That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it?
In AmE, I think the "blatant" pronunciation is more proper for the adjective, but the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly.
Let's hope that Erk's patents aren't patently obvious (= WolffE "lacking inventive step"???).
That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it?
In AmE, I think the "blatant" pronunciation is more proper for the adjective, but the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly.
Let's hope that Erk's patents aren't patently obvious (= WolffE "lacking inventive step"???).
00
[nq:1]Hi I used to think that the standard "correct" expression was"patently obvious", and that "blatantly obvious" was an incorrect guess basedon mishearing/misunderstanding. However, "blatantly obvious" now seemsto be almost universal, and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong! Any thoughts?[/nq]You're not entirely wrong. But "blatant" is real English: it comes from Spenser, who's usually good en
00
[nq:2]In the UK, "blatant" rhymes with "patent", usually.[/nq]
[nq:1]That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it? In AmE, I think the "blatant" ... the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly. Let's hope that Erk's patents aren't patently obvious (= WolffE "lacking inventive step"???).[/nq]
I come, I come (slightly delayed by catching fly (no,
[nq:1]That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it? In AmE, I think the "blatant" ... the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly. Let's hope that Erk's patents aren't patently obvious (= WolffE "lacking inventive step"???).[/nq]
I come, I come (slightly delayed by catching fly (no,
00
[nq:2]Hi I used to think that the standard "correct" expression ... and I'm beginning to wonder if I'm wrong! Any thoughts?[/nq]
[nq:1]'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readily visible" of the adjective 'patent'. It ... to the other version. You may be right that it arose as an alteration, but that doesn't make it wrong![/nq]
Not wrong,
[nq:1]'Patently obvious' is indeed a collocation of long standing, having outlived the sense "readily visible" of the adjective 'patent'. It ... to the other version. You may be right that it arose as an alteration, but that doesn't make it wrong![/nq]
Not wrong,
00
[nq:2]In the UK, "blatant" rhymes with "patent", usually.[/nq]
[nq:1]That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it?[/nq]
Yes, but some Brits pronounce the noun "patent" with a short a.
[nq:1]In AmE, I think the "blatant" pronunciation is more proper for the adjective, but the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly. Let's hope that Erk's pate
[nq:1]That's not true of the (adjective-derived) noun 'patent' as in 'letters patent', is it?[/nq]
Yes, but some Brits pronounce the noun "patent" with a short a.
[nq:1]In AmE, I think the "blatant" pronunciation is more proper for the adjective, but the 'pat' pronunciation is heard more commonly. Let's hope that Erk's pate
00
[nq:1]In the UK, "blatant" rhymes with "patent", usually.[/nq]
And if they don't, perhaps some of the legal fundis here can tell us how they say "latent and patent defects".
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
And if they don't, perhaps some of the legal fundis here can tell us how they say "latent and patent defects".
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
0
Related Questions