Securing Electricity Meter Cupboard

[JohnW2]

PS if you search YouTube some guy actually set up a system to give himself shocks, it seemed even at around 20mA it was very painful, so an RCD wont save you from falling off a ladder.

Even very small electric shocks can result in people falling off ladders, with consequent injuries (just as can non-electric 'shocks' - such as creeping up behind them and shouting "boo" in their ear!).

If you're unlucky (and/or have a pre-existing medical problem, of which you might be unaware), 20mA could kill you.

Kind Regards, John

 

[penguin16]

Someone is probably going to telly you that "electrocuted" means 'killed by electric shock' - so that one can't really have "seriously electrocuted" (a bit like "slightly pregnant"!).

I do love the pedantry around here! The Oxford dictionary defines "electrocute" as "injure or kill by electric shock". In light of this, I would say degrees of electric shock could be defined this way.

 

[JohnW2]

I do love the pedantry around here!

Don't tell me - but that's why I 'warned' you. If I hadn't (and maybe even though I have), you would probably have got some sarcastic comments!

The Oxford dictionary defines "electrocute" as "injure or kill by electric shock". In light of this, I would say degrees of electric shock could be defined this way.

Indeed - but to be sort-of fair to the pedants, I think it's just about the only dictionary which does give that definition - and I think that they probably all agree that the derivation of the word implies 'kill'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

So what's the typical conductivity of a damp concrete floor - say in a bathroom ? Is that enough to cause a dangerous current to flow through someone stepping out of the bath/shower with wet bare feet and touching a tap ?

It would probably be a pretty low-impedance, possibly pretty dangerous, route to earth.

However, I would think it must be extremely rare to have a ground floor bathroom with a concrete floor built straight onto earth with no DPM or suchlike, and with absolutely no floor covering. The moment one has virtually any floor covering (or any 'anti-damp' measures in, or under, the concrete), the path to earth probably usually becomes high enough for any current through a person not to be, in itself, particularly dangerous.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

The Oxford English Dictionary is WRONG.

It does seem to be staffed by those who believe that a majority, or possibly even a minority, of the population using words wrongly (look up literally in the OED) means that the meaning of those words is somehow changed by these errors, and pandering to the modern concept that it is unacceptable to tell anyone that they have made a mistake and are thus simply wrong.

I realise that this has happened to words in the past but that is no justification for changing definitions at the merest whim without reason.

Use another dictionary as the OED seems to be the lexicographical equivalent of the OSG.

 

[penguin16]

Who ultimately decides on the "correct" meaning of the word, though?

The fact that many refer to electrocution as both injury and death would suggest that its meaning has naturally changed and it has now become ambiguous.

Ultimately, it makes little difference as the true meaning in the context of a discussion can usually be inferred quite easily. In this example, albeit unintentionally, I used it as meaning injury or death which was signified by the "seriously" prefix.

 

[EFLImpudence]

That the majority are wrong does not make it right.

The word, i believe, was invented and comes from electricity and execute so, strictly speaking, no one has ever been electrocuted in Britain - but I suppose that is going a bit too far as things stand.

If I said my house was infested by giraffes - using one word wrongly - would I be wrong or should the meaning of the word be changed?

In this example, albeit unintentionally, I used it as meaning injury or death which was signified by the "seriously" prefix.

That just signified that you did not know what the word really meant.

 

[JohnD]

The Oxford English Dictionary is WRONG.

No.

It is not the first duty of the lexicographer or grammarian to decide how people should speak.

Their first duty is to discover how people do speak.

What does "nice" mean?

What does "presently" mean?

What does "our mutual friend" mean?

What does "pavement" mean?

Do you know what a "light bulb" is?

Are there any people on this website, aged under 90, who work as plumbers?

 

[JohnW2]

If I said my house was infested by giraffes - using one word wrongly - would I be wrong or should the meaning of the word be changed?

The answer to that is obvious. However, it might be a bit less obvious if a few million people had, for a substantial period of time, been regularly using the word to have whatever meaning you intend.

As I've said before, we no longer speak the language of Chaucer - and that is at least partially because people have come to use words in a manner which would have been regarded as 'incorrect' by him, and we have eventually decided to accept that new usage as 'correct'.

Kind Regards, John

 

[EFLImpudence]

Why is the answer to that obvious? What is the difference? Not enough wrong yet.

As I've said before, it's too late to undo what is already done but that is no reason to alter the dictionary because the present culture is determined by Joey Essex rather than Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Do you think nothing should be done to maintain standards?

Until a word no longer means what it really does mean it is too soon to redefine it.

What does 'wicked' mean today? Does it no longer mean evil?

This results in the language being determined by the ignorant.
We may as well do away with punctuation, grammar and spelling.

 

[JohnD]

what it really does mean

no such thing.

You mean "what it used to mean."

You're just getting old and crotchety.

Light bulb.

Coach.

 

[EFLImpudence]

no such thing.

Of course there is.

You mean "what it used to mean."

What it still means. It doesn't happen instantly.

You're just getting old and crotchety.

With good reason.

Light bulb.

Some are not bulbous.

Coach.

Lots of meanings.

If I ring Rentokil (one L?) and complain about the giraffes, they will correct me. What's the difference?

 

[ban-all-sheds]

The Oxford dictionary defines "electrocute" as "injure or kill by electric shock".

To their undying shame it does indeed.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

No.

It is not the first duty of the lexicographer or grammarian to decide how people should speak.

How many ignorami have to misuse a word before the lexicographers give in and say "Oh, OK then - we will change the meaning of the word so that it corresponds with your uneducated stupidity"?

 

[JohnW2]

Do you think nothing should be done to maintain standards?

That obviously depends on what one means by "maintaining standards". You seem to think that everything should be done to prevent any further evolution of language.

Until a word no longer means what it really does mean it is too soon to redefine it.

That is precisely my (and winston's) view about "transformer", but you and others seem to disagree. As I've said, if the components that had for decades been known as "transformers" no longer existed, then I would see no problem with now using the word to refer to something else (even if it has the same or similar functionality. However, those components do still exist.

Kind Regards, John