Prior

Status
Not open for further replies.

Allen165

Key Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Switzerland
"The Agreement may be terminated by either party upon 30 days' prior written notice."

I think "upon" renders "prior" redundant. Do you agree?

Thanks!
 

billmcd

Key Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
"The Agreement may be terminated by either party upon 30 days' prior written notice."

I think "upon" renders "prior" redundant. Do you agree?

Thanks!

Well, maybe but if you remove it, you should replace it with "with" (sorry for the redundant redundancy :-D).
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Well, maybe but if you remove it, you should replace it with "with" (sorry for the redundant redundancy :-D).
I don't understand why it's correct when we replace "prior" with "with". Could you explain it? The apostrophe in days' makes "with" very strange to me...
 

bhaisahab

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Member Type
Retired English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
England
Current Location
Ireland
I don't understand why it's correct when we replace "prior" with "with". Could you explain it? The apostrophe in days' makes "with" very strange to me...
I find "prior" absolutely fine and not redundant. If you replace it with "with" you would have to remove the apostrophe from "days'"
 

SoothingDave

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Member Type
Interested in Language
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
It seems redundant to me. Of course the notice is "prior". It wouldn't be of much purpose to provide 30 days of notice afterwards.
 

emsr2d2

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
UK
It seems redundant to me. Of course the notice is "prior". It wouldn't be of much purpose to provide 30 days of notice afterwards.

I agree. If you provide notice, I'm pretty sure it always means in advance or prior.
 

billmcd

Key Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
I don't understand why it's correct when we replace "prior" with "with". Could you explain it? The apostrophe in days' makes "with" very strange to me...

I didn't suggest replacing "prior" with "with". Replace "upon" with "with".
 

billmcd

Key Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
I find "prior" absolutely fine and not redundant. If you replace it with "with" you would have to remove the apostrophe from "days'"

bhaisahab: please see my subsequent post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top