"to be occupied with doing smth" vs. "to do smth"

Question

Could you please advise, is there a tangible difference between the

meanings of the following two expressions:

(i) to be occupied with paper delivery

(ii) to deliver papers

(If a person is occupied with paper delivery, he or she may be not

a courier, but a manager or whatsoever. But let's restrict the range

of possible positions in this abstract delivery firm by only a single one

– a courier.)

I have once encountered (i) marked as an error and corrected to (ii),

with which I was not capable to agree. (i) does not seem to be an error;

(ii) seems just a more straightforward and laconic way to convey the

same idea.

Do you agree?

Thanks in advance.

--

Victor

Mr Wordy · Accepted Answer

(i) is possible, but it does not mean that the person's occupation (i.e. job) is to deliver papers or is involved in paper delivery. If someone is "occupied with paper delivery" it means that they are currently engaged in delivering paper(s), and that this is taking their time and attention to the exclusion of other activities.

If someone "delivers papers" then it normally means they habitually deliver them, typically because it's their job.

When describing an occupation, "delivers papers" would often be understood to refer to newspapers (though as an individual activity it may refer, for example, to legal or business documents). "paper delivery" might refer to newspapers or bulk paper supplies, but it's unlikely to refer to documents. Of course, the context will often clarify any ambiguity.

Victor_amelkin · Answer

Hello Mr Wordy,

Thanks for your comments. Sorry, "paper" in my previous post is
a misspelled "newspaper"; the "news-" prefix has accidentally

slipped out...

--

Victor

"to be occupied with doing smth" vs. "to do smth"

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions