Philip  +  875725 Wed, 26 Aug 09 04:07 PM We're talking about getting rid of things that we don't use, especially as when downsizing from a house to a condo.  Is the following parallel in structure, or are there "too many words"?   And the longer it has been since we last used it before getting rid of it, the sooner it is that we want it afterward.   Thanks especially to native speakers and strict grammarians.     Philip Joined on Thu, Jun 23 2005 Veteran Member 8,738 At reise er at leve! - H. C. Andersen Speaking, Chat, Friendships

	Kooyeen  +  875892 Wed, 26 Aug 09 06:34 PM Hi, I'm not a native speaker, but as a learner I found it difficult to understand. Yeah, too many words I guess. It took me a bit (but I'm probably retarded) to understand it's a kind of Murphy's law, right? The longer you haven't used it, the sooner you'll need it if you decide to get rid of it. Is that what you mean? But I'm not sure my example is grammatical. Kooyeen Joined on Thu, Dec 22 2005 Italy Senior Member 4,981 Parental Advisory / Explicit Posts

	Philip  +  876015 Wed, 26 Aug 09 08:25 PM Right, Kooyeen.  It's a Murphy's law type of situation, and your "translation" is perfect.  I may use it in place of the original. Philip

	CalifJim  +  876042 Wed, 26 Aug 09 08:46 PM I don't see anything wrong with the grammar.  As to the wordiness, it's a matter of style.  I think with some thought it could be boiled down to a nice little aphorism, if that's what's wanted.  You might modify to your liking something like this, for example: Discard something long unused and you'll soon need it -- the longer unused, the sooner needed. CJ CalifJim Joined on Mon, Aug 2 2004 California Veteran Member 22,454 "There are no facts, only interpretations" - Nietzsche Countries, France, Styles

	Philip  +  876177 Wed, 26 Aug 09 10:46 PM More sound advice.  Thanks,  CJ. Philip