ESL General English Grammar Questions

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Thu, 20 Oct 2005 00:56:12 GMT

C. gather together - This is like "interview", you gather potential employees together before hiring one.
â You don't "gather potential employees together", during an interview. You keep them apart.

You sure don't invite the whole town. You do select viable candidates for a job, and yes you can interview them as a group. I understand the JET program in Japan does this. I have never gone through their interview process, but I did do one similar where we were selected based on a private 1 to 1 discussion as well as a 1 to 10 discussion.

D. disregard - This is like "bias", disregarding a potential employee based on race, sex, or possibly beliefs.
â "to be biassed towards" is not "to disregard": to have bias, you must first "regard" them (i.e. take notice of them). Otherwise you wouldn't know what their sex, etc. was.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=disregard+that+last+comment

E. dissolve - This is like "fire", dissolving them from the company.
â You don't dissolve something "from" something. When you dissolve a partnership, or a marriage, you dissolve the whole. You are then left with separated components.

Yep, the empoyer stays as one part. The ex-employee goes off and finds another job, the second part.

A. leave idle - This is like "reapply". The potential employee is not wishing to work doing another job or with another company. So, instead of applying to other companies, they "idle" until the next time they can apply.
â With "leave idle", the potential employee is the object of the verb. With "idle", the p.e. is the subject. You have switched from one to the other. (You can't leave yourself idle.)

So, is this person going to illegally enter the company's premises and force a job be granted? Are they going to do this through some union?

B. deny access - Well, I think this is like "not employ". You are not forcing/allowing a potential employee to wait, you are simply denying access to your company or the company you represent. These potential employees you deny access can apply to other companies, and assuming they all get jobs elsewhere, they won't be idle. Even if they don't get a job, I don't feel they are in idle as they are doing something to get a job.
â Now you're discussing one possible antonym (deny access) in terms of another (leave idle). Your task is to demonstrate that "deny access" is an antonym of "employ". But in fact you've demonstrated that those who are denied access may in fact get jobs elsewhere. In other words, they may be employed.

They will never be employed by the same company unless there is some reapplication or change in the previous decision to NOT EMPLOY them (which is the best thing to an antonym as I can see). The task is not to demonstrate that "deny access" is the antonym of "employ", the task is to choose the best answer that best fits. That doesn't mean it will correspond 100% to our perception of the antonym of "employ".

In order for the answer to be A, I would think of a person who has lost all hope. They aren't going to apply to another company, and they aren't going to reapply to the same company. They are just going to sit there in idle misery.
â So...umm...that would mean they were unemployed, no?

Yes, but many people don't do that. They look for another job and get employed elsewhere (people got to eat). They don't just sit there idle (and starve to death).

Re: Antonym/employ

MrPedantic — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 23:47:45 GMT

MrP

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 05:29:14 GMT

Exactly, nothing. That was my sign-off from a farcical debate.

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 05:01:01 GMT

"Continue employing..."

Exactly, you had to modify "employ" with the word "continue" because the word "employ" itself does not mean continue.

http://employ.to/site

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 04:19:49 GMT

Wwwdotcom wrote:

In the case of employing someone, you aren't continuing to use them....You are starting.

Continue employing your own personal style of music. I'm off to another concert, though.

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:19:40 GMT

To cease using? If you employ something that doesn't mean you were already using it. It means the start of using something. In the case of employing someone, you aren't continuing to use them which would be the opposite of ceasing to employ them. You are starting.

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 01:13:47 GMT

Wwwdotcom wrote:

To "leave idle" means to abandon.

I don't agree. Unless you complete it with abandoning the use of.

abandon: 5 a : to cease from maintaining, practicing, or using (again, Merriam-Webster).

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:57:32 GMT

To "leave idle" means to abandon. The antonym for abandon is "pursue" NOT "employ".

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:44:39 GMT

Wwwdotcom wrote:

There is a difference.

What's the difference?

leave idle: leave unoccupied or unemployed: as a : being left with no employment.

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 00:32:43 GMT

"Write your own unique dictionary, Wwwdot. You might become rich and famous... like Merriam-Webster: idle: not occupied or employed: as a : having no employment."

That definition doesn't contradict my analysis. Also, the answer in question was "leave idle" which I don't see in OUR definition of the word idle. Perhaps you should write your own English test and hope for the best. There is a difference.

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 23:02:37 GMT

Write your own unique dictionary, Wwwdot. You might become rich and famous... like Merriam-Webster: idle: not occupied or employed: as a : having no employment.

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 22:29:03 GMT

"While something is idle it cannot at the same time be employed/used"

A car can be idle and in use at the same time.

"if its employed, it is not idle."

1. If A, then not B - can be true

2. If not A, then B - not necessarily

1. If the smoke detector goes off, then the house is not safe (either because there is a fire or the battery needs replacing).

2. If the smoke detector does not go off, then the house is safe. BAHHH!!! WRONG!!!! The battery could still need to be changed, and the house could be on fire.

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 21:18:31 GMT

Idle and used are opposite concepts. There is no way around it. While something is idle it cannot at the same time be employed/used (unless it has two lives). If something is employed, it doesn't matter who is employing it or who is not; if its employed, it is not idle.

Re: Antonym/employ

Wwwdotcom — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:47:06 GMT

Just because you may not be employing something (putting something to use) doesn't mean someone else isn't either.

Re: Antonym/employ

davkett — Mon, 17 Oct 2005 20:37:52 GMT

Leave idle is the obvious choice for me, as in Khoff's example.

Employ = to use

Leave idle = not to use