Consider the following two sentences:
a) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' to intentionally gloss the distinction between parse paths and parse states.
b) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' to intentionally gloss over the distinction between parse paths and parse states.
(Yes, I know, the infinitive is split.)
a) was my original choice. b) sounds like the more common usage.
From the OED:GLOSS v.1:

To veil with glosses; to explain away; to read a different sense into. Also with away, over (the latter perh. influenced by GLOSS v.2).

GLOSS v.2:
trans. To put a gloss upon. a. In immaterial sense: To give a fair appearance to; to veil in specious language. Also with over, and in indirect passive.
I'm using an intentionally vague term to underscore that the discussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quite right.
Joseph
1 2 3 4
Consider the following two sentences: a) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' ... states. (Yes, I know, the infinitive is split.) a) was my original choice. b) sounds like the more common usage.

From the OED:

GLOSS v.1: To veil with glosses; to explain away; to read a different sense into. Also with away, over (the ... an intentionally vague term to underscore that the discussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quite right.

For me, "Gloss over". I haven't heard the other variants used in this sense, whatever OED says.
Cheers - Ian
(UK - Yorks, Notts, Hants)
Consider the following two sentences: a) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' ... states. (Yes, I know, the infinitive is split.) a) was my original choice. b) sounds like the more common usage.

From the OED:

GLOSS v.1: To veil with glosses; to explain away; to read a different sense into. Also with away, over (the ... an intentionally vague term to underscore that the discussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quite right.

"Gloss over" is too colloquial for this context, so, if you believe that "gloss" is the wrong word, you need to choose a different verb altogether.

Adrian
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
I'm using an intentionally vague term to underscore that thediscussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quiteright.

"Gloss over" is too colloquial for this context, so, if you believethat "gloss" is the wrong word, you need to choose a different verbaltogether.

I don't believe it's the wrong word.
Which is to say, I like it as it is written.
So my question is: If some bookish fifi tries to assail my diction, can the matter be taken to the books?
Joseph
Adrian Bailey wrote something:

So my question is: If some bookish fifi tries to assail my diction,can the matter be taken to the books?

Postscript: Just so I'm not misread, I wasn't calling you a bookish fifi.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, I am one myself (which is why I hate to be called out on some ***.)
Joseph
Consider the following two sentences: a) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' ... states. (Yes, I know, the infinitive is split.) a) was my original choice. b) sounds like the more common usage.

From the OED:

GLOSS v.1: To veil with glosses; to explain away; to read a different sense into. Also with away, over (the ... an intentionally vague term to underscore that the discussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quite right.

The question is, are "we" intending to explain something or hide something? To gloss (which I only rarely see) is to explain by means of a comment or footnote or similar (think "glossary"). To gloss over is (among other things) to hide, to skip over something in hopes it won't be noticed,
M-W agrees, but it also indicates the first can be combined with "away" to make the same negative sense as "to explain away" their example is . So just as you can either explain or explain away, you can gloss or gloss away (something). Besides the "over" one.

The two "glosses" come from different roots; the first from a word for "word," the second from shiny paint. The reason I know all this is that they were discussed here many moons ago.

Best Donna Richoux
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
The question is, are "we" intending to explain something or hide something? To gloss (which I only rarely see) is ... So just as you can either explain or explain away, you cangloss or gloss away (something). Besides the "over" one.

What if we intend to explain something by explaining away a confounding variable?
I think the usage is okay, albeit unsettling since it plays on both antonymous meanings.
Joseph
Consider the following two sentences: a) Nonetheless, as this setup is equally applicable to states, we use the term ``parse'' ... states. (Yes, I know, the infinitive is split.) a) was my original choice. b) sounds like the more common usage.

From the OED:

GLOSS v.1: To veil with glosses; to explain away; to read a different sense into. Also with away, over (the ... an intentionally vague term to underscore that the discussion can be generalized, and neither of these definitions seems quite right.

The problem appears to be your wish to be
"intentionally vague." As the dictionary suggests, this word has two distinct meanings:

1 Gloss = write an explanatory footnote
2 Gloss over = misdirect via supposed explanation.

These usages point to two quite different related words: gloss q.v. glossary, from Greek = "word."
gloss cf. glossy, as a shiny and reflective surface.

It seems faster for you to choose an intentionally precise term.

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
discussion right.

Good. Adrian is wrong on both counts. Asserting that a phrasal verb is 'too colloquial' for your context is spellbinding.
Which is to say, I like it as it is written.

Great.
So my question is: If some bookish fifi tries to assail my diction, can the matter be taken to the books? Joseph

Yes. See Donna R's comment, among others.
I sense that AUE will have an outbreak of posters being called bookish fifis. I love it.
dgb
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Show more