<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on the case of in case</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/more-on-the-case-of-in-case/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/more-on-the-case-of-in-case</link>
	<description>Language in a word</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:04:18 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Wheeler</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/more-on-the-case-of-in-case/comment-page-1#comment-17573</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Wheeler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:32:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=292#comment-17573</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m surprised to read that British English speakers are unfamiliar with the prepositional &#039;in case of&#039;. Fowler in 1926 gave &#039;in case of fire, sound the alarm&#039; (repeated in the Gowers revision of 1965) as an example of good idiomatic usage.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m surprised to read that British English speakers are unfamiliar with the prepositional &#8216;in case of&#8217;. Fowler in 1926 gave &#8216;in case of fire, sound the alarm&#8217; (repeated in the Gowers revision of 1965) as an example of good idiomatic usage.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Cowan</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/more-on-the-case-of-in-case/comment-page-1#comment-8696</link>
		<dc:creator>John Cowan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 22:50:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=292#comment-8696</guid>
		<description>Neal: Correct.  It is equivalent to &quot;if and only if&quot;, which is sometimes written &quot;iff&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neal: Correct.  It is equivalent to &#8220;if and only if&#8221;, which is sometimes written &#8220;iff&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neal Whitman</title>
		<link>http://www.linguism.co.uk/language/more-on-the-case-of-in-case/comment-page-1#comment-8147</link>
		<dc:creator>Neal Whitman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 03:46:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linguism.co.uk/?p=292#comment-8147</guid>
		<description>&lt;I&gt;Just in case&lt;/i&gt;, which in ordinary English is just an intensified version of the &quot;lest&quot; meaning, in academic English means &quot;only in the case that&quot;. It took me a while to catch on to this, and the explanations where &lt;I&gt;just in case&lt;/i&gt; occurred made much more sense once I did.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Just in case</i>, which in ordinary English is just an intensified version of the &#8220;lest&#8221; meaning, in academic English means &#8220;only in the case that&#8221;. It took me a while to catch on to this, and the explanations where <i>just in case</i> occurred made much more sense once I did.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
