Hello,
I’m trying to come up with an accurate interpretation of “ringing endorsement” in the following dialog:
A: I believe he’s innocent.
B: It’s not a ringing endorsement.
Does speaker B mean that speaker A’s words alone are not assurance enough?
Thanks!
Yes. For example, perhaps speaker A is not innocent himself, or perhaps he has been proved wrong many times when he has felt other people are innocent.
Hello Bev,
So I take it that “a ringing endorsement” basically mean “assurance”.
By the way, is the word “ringing” operative in the expression, or can we leave it out?
Is it there for emphasis only?
Thanks again!
Ringing - resounding. (In the same way that a ‘resounding success’ is a very great success).
It can be left out, but it is used as a measure of just how greatly (or not) you are assured. Without it, the phrase loses the sense of just how strong (or not) the endorsement is/would be.
Hi Torsten,
Here I am again.
I was doing the listening test and I have a doubt.
In the sentence " The couple (are) sitting on a bench. Is the verb correct?
I thought it should be: "The couple (is) sitting on a bench.
That’s how it goes in Portuguese.
Thanks,
Maristela
I understand you confusion over this. Strictly speaking they are one couple, so ‘is’ is correct. However it has become common when talking about two people, even though they are one couple, to treat them seperately, so you will hear ‘the couple are…’ a lot, and it is largely considered acceptable to do so.
I am reminded of a British TV show, where the host would announce
“The first couple through to the next round are…”
and, when taking her turn, the hostess would announce
“The next couple through is…”
and so they would continue.