0

There are two books. What are the differences between Example 1 and Example 2?

Example 1

One of the books is a must-read.

Example 2

Either of the books is a must-read.

Improve this question
2
  • Both utterances are "weird". It's highly unlikely only one of the books is a must-read, so probably the intended meaning should be expressed as Both of the books are a must-read (or ...are must-reads - the preferred syntax for "casual coinages" such as the noun must-read isn't exactly set in stone).
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 14:41
  • 1
    It's okay to say Either book is worth reading, because the implication is the addressee might not have the time or inclination to read both (so he can pick either of them). But it makes no sense to say Either book is a must-read, because the attribute must-read doesn't leave scope for addressee to only read one book - he must read both books.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 14:46

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
3

One book is a "must-read" in example 1.

Two books are a "must-read" in example 2.

Example 1 implies that only one out of the total number of books is a "must-read".

In Example 2, both books are considered a "must-read". You could choose either of the two books and would always end up with a "must-read".

Improve this answer
1
  • If both books are a must-read, then you need to read both books. As soon as there is an alternative book for you to read instead of the first one, then the first one ceases to be a must-read.
    – Jaime
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 12:58
0

For example 1: one of the books is boring/unsuitable/irrelevant but the statement does not distinguish which book is the "must read" and which is the other.

For example 2: both books are "must reads", but reading just one of them is sufficient. The statement does not guide as to which is best, leaving the choice to the reader.

Improve this answer
2
  • If reading either one of the two books is sufficient then neither of the books is a must-read.
    – Jaime
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 12:56
  • ... and the fact that a book is not a must-read doesn't necessarily imply that it's "boring, unsuitable or irrelevant." It may simply supply fascinating and highly relevant - though non-essential - information.
    – Jaime
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 13:03
-1

I agree that if you say "one of the books is a must-read," then what you mean is quite literally that one of them is a must-read, almost certainly with the implication that the other isn't.

However, I don't think the second example is a good solution either. Its meaning is at best inelegantly expressed (if not entirely self-contradictory). In fact, the only way I can squeeze a modicum of sense out of the sentence is by concluding that neither of the books is a must-read, since it appears you need not read one of them as long as you read the other.

I'd express that intention very differently (dispensing with the expression "must-read" altogether):

e.g.: "You'll need to read one or other [of the two books]."

Improve this answer
1
  • No. It's "...almost certainly with the implication that the other is also a must-read". Otherwise we'd have to suppose the context is some kind of weird "guessing game" where the addressee is being invited to figure out which book is essential reading, and which isn't. And that would probably require the addressee to read both books so he could tell which was which.
    – FumbleFingers
    Commented Mar 21, 2023 at 14:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .