Subj : Re: Totally To : Adept From : Nightfox Date : Fri Aug 11 2023 12:41 pm Re: Re: Totally By: Adept to Nightfox on Fri Aug 11 2023 06:40 pm Ni> pF>>> I was in an accident with my well-loved 2014 Toyota Plug-in Prius, Ni> pF>>> a Ni>> I'm not sure what you mean about the phrasing.. How does it imply that Ni>> the car crashed itself? I don't think that's what the phrasing says. I Ad> Think of it this way -- imagine if it was a drunk driver who caused the Ad> damage. Would we say, "I was in an accident", or would we say, "A drunk Ad> driver crashed into my car"? Even if the damage was exactly the same? Seems like splitting hairs there, and I'm not sure what difference it makes, unless you specifically want to make the point that it was a drunk driver. If you're just explaining why you're injured, for instance, do you really need to mention that it was a drunk driver? I'd think it can suffice to say "I was in a car accident". Ad> Quite possibly. But, from the phrasing, it very well could be a car that Ad> was driving itself. Maybe, but self-driving cars are a relatively new thing (and personally I don't know anyone who has one). When people say "I was in a car accident", I think it's fairly well understood that people were probably driving the cars involved. When self-driving cars become a lot more common, I think it could become more of a question. Ad> I've sometimes tilted at windmills a bit on this, but mostly because of "Tilted at windmills"? I've never heard that before.. Ad> But if a bicyclist crashed, people probably wouldn't say, "my bike got Ad> into an accident and now I have to get a new frame.". And news articles Ad> don't use that passive language, either. We wouldn't say that because it wasn't just the bike that got into an accident.. You were riding on it, so I'd probably say "I was in a bike accident" or "I was in an accident while riding my bike" or something similar. Nightfox --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux * Origin: Digital Distortion: digdist.synchro.net (21:1/137) .