3

I have a question about the phrase "go off". According to most dictionaries, "go off" could be used like this:

  1. The gun went off.
  2. A bomb went off.

, where both "gun" and "bomb" are devices. But, on the web, examples like the following are found:

  1. Gunfire went off.
  2. An explosion went off.

, where "gunfire" and "explosion" are actions. Dictionaries seem to only allow sentences 1 and 2, but not 3 and 4.

What do native speakers think? Are sentences 3 & 4 standard English?

| improve this question | |
  • 2
    My feeling is that it's understandable but not standard. If you compare gun went off/gunfire went off you'll see that the gunfire version is vanishingly rare: books.google.com/ngrams/… – stangdon May 15 '17 at 11:19
  • Isn't it remarkable how so many attestations of "gunfire went off" (indluding a series of gunfire went off) occur in pulp fiction? google.com/… – Tᴚoɯɐuo May 15 '17 at 13:42
  • @Tᴚoɯɐuo, I ave see worse writing... but not very often. – JavaLatte Feb 2 '18 at 5:00
  • 3 and 4 are acceptable but clunky. 1 and 2 are better and sound more natural. – Luca Mackenzie Mar 4 '18 at 23:43
  • In strict theory, you are wholly correct; “Gunfire…” and “An explosion” don’t “go off” but that’s not how most people think or speak. Please consider instead, “a fast speed…” when despite common usage, there cannot really be such a thing. A high speed” is logical. A fast speed actually means a “speedy speed”. Then, are we interested in linguistic rules, or everyday use of language? – Robbie Goodwin May 10 '18 at 20:01
1

We use the term 'go off' about a change of state: something that happens just once. At one moment the gun contains powder and a bullet: the next it contains only smoke. The same is true of bombs, fireworks, foodstuffs (albeit rather slower). For an alarm clock, it descibes the moment when the clock starts ringing. If a person goes off something, it means that they stop liking something... a state change from liking to not.

Because it is a state change, it works for a single shot from a rifle, pistol or shotgun, but the term does not fit comfortably with the continuous discharge of an automatic weapon.

Gunfire is a continuous activity and so, like the automatic weapon, it doesn't sit naturally with going off.... unless, like the alarm clock, you choose to regard it as the moment that the gunfire started. So, gunfire going off is understandable, and it is used, but it does not sound natural.

An explosion is already a state change: it sounds wrong to talk about a state change of a state change. An explosion going off does occur, but again it does not sound natural.

| improve this answer | |
0

Both 3 & 4 are acceptable and understandable

Gunfire suddenly went off in the distance.
the sudden sound of gunfire was heard in the distance

An explosion went off and set the factory on fire.
an explosion set the factory on fire

| improve this answer | |
  • More accurately, it's the bombs and guns that go off although gunfire and explosions are often said to do so. – Ronald Sole May 15 '17 at 9:35
  • 1
    Understandable I guess, but I don't know about "acceptable". The gunfire doesn't "go off", the gunfire is the act the gun of going off. It's like saying "the sound made a noise." – stangdon May 15 '17 at 11:20
  • I like "gunfire erupted" – malaprop Mar 5 '18 at 0:46
0

The gun… or A bomb went off are fine and it doesn’t matter that they’re devices. People can go off in much the same way. Gunfire… or An explosion went off are perfectly understandable but wholly unidiomatic, tautological and largely ungrammatical. Gunfire is not something independent: it’s the result of a gun going off. An explosion is not something independent: it’s the result of a bomb going off. By the way no; none of them are actions. Firing a gun is an action and it isn’t gunfire. Gunfire is a noun. A bomb exploding is an action and it isn’t an explosion. An explosion is a noun.

| improve this answer | |
  • They're just careless, unless the speaker wants argue about it. In that case, they're wrong. Idiomatically The gun went off is correct and Gunfire went off wrong but that’s because strictly, The gun was fired which makes gunfire was fired tautological; it clearly repeats itself. Your explosion is very much less clear but still, broadly similar. – Robbie Goodwin Nov 19 '17 at 17:26
0

Gunfire and explosions arent actions, they're things. Therefore, all examples are correct

However, you can't strictly say

Exploding went off

The firing of a gun went off

People might say it, but its very slang, so dont use it

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.