The time limit is/was 90 minutes

[kadioguy]

(On a web page)

After going to One Piece exhibition, my nephew, niece, and I went to Pizza Hut for its buffet. The time limit is 90 minutes. After an hour of eating, my nephew said he could still eat, but he didn’t want to stuff himself. I told him not to eat anymore.

On my way home, I was thinking why in Taiwan quite a lot of people think if you don’t stuff yourself in an all-you-can-eat restaurant, you waste your money. I remember my mom used to say she wastes her money every time she went to a buffet restaurant because she could only eat a little bit. I really don’t know why people in Taiwan have this kind of concept about buffet restaurants.

(Quoted from https://tinyurl.com/y53b5oy8)
-----------
1.
a. The time limit is 90 minutes.
b. The time limit was 90 minutes.

In this context, are both acceptable? I think the answer is "yes", because (a) means it is still true now, whereas (b) means it happened in the past. Am I right in thinking this?

2.
If so, which tense sounds more natural to native speakers? Or is it just a choice of writing style?

3. I think the red "wastes" should be "wasted". What do you think?

 

[kadioguy]

I would find the present tense natural only with the addition of something like 'at Pizza Huts'.

I see the humor of the reply. Do you mean restaurants like Pizza Hut always have a time limit for customers to eat food in their place? ;-)

 

[Tarheel]

Does somebody keep track of how much time you spend eating?
:-?

 

[kadioguy]

Does somebody keep track of how much time you spend eating?

Hi, Tarheel

In Taiwan, when you enter that kind of restaurant, a waiter/waitress will seat you, and then he or she will write down the time, for example 6.00, on your bill, so that means you can stay at the restaurant until 7.30, if the time limit is 90 minutes. You can eat as much as possible within the time limit.

 

[teechar]

After going to the One Piece exhibition, my nephew, niece, and I went to Pizza Hut for [STRIKE]its[/STRIKE] their buffet. The time limit is 90 minutes. After an hour, [STRIKE]of eating,[/STRIKE] my nephew said he could still keep going, [STRIKE]eat,[/STRIKE] but he didn’t want to stuff himself. I told him not to eat anymore.
On my way home, I was [STRIKE]thinking[/STRIKE] wondering why in Taiwan quite a lot of people think if you don’t stuff yourself in an all-you-can-eat restaurant, you waste your money.

By the way, not all buffets are all you can eat.

 

[Tarheel]

Hi, Tarheel

In Taiwan, when you enter that kind of restaurant, a waiter/waitress will seat you, and then he or she will write down the time, for example 6.00, on your bill, so that means you can stay at the restaurant until 7.30, if the time limit is 90 minutes. You can eat as much as possible within the time limit.

I prefer:

You can eat as much as you want.

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", and that's not what's intended.

 

[kadioguy]

While the phrase is "all you can eat" and taken literally, it means "all you can stuff into yourself"—that's not what's intended.

I would add a comma and a dash, to make it more readable.

 

[Tarheel]

I would add a comma or a dash, to make it more readable.

Two things. One, I meant to say if taken literally (as the revised text reads). Two, I considered adding additional punctuation, but I didn't want it to look messy. (Was it not readable?)

 

[kadioguy]

I would add a comma and a dash, to make it more readable.

Hi Tarheel,

I used "and", because I did add a comma after "literally" and a dash after "yourself". Please see my reply with quote in post #9.

Two, I considered adding additional punctuation, but I didn't want it to look messy. (Was it not readable?)

I would add two commas in your revised sentence, and then it would look clearer to me.

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", that's not what's intended.

 

[GoesStation]

I would add two commas in your revised sentence, and then it would look clearer to me.

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", that's not what's intended.

The final comma makes a comma splice.

 

[kadioguy]

The final comma makes a comma splice.

Hi GoesStation,

I see the sentence as

a. While the phrase is "all you can eat", that's not what's intended.
b. If taken literally, it means "all you can stuff into yourself"

So (a)+(b)

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself",that's not what's intended.

 

[kadioguy]

While the phrase is "all you can eat" if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself" that's not what's intended.

Well, I have to admit that without appropriate punctuation, this sentence is difficult for me to understand. :-?

 

[Tarheel]

I have decided that the sentence in question did indeed need a couple of changes. I have added two commas and a conjunction. (No dash.)

Hopefully, the revised sentence will meet your approval.

 

[GoesStation]

Hi I see the sentence as

a. While the phrase is "all you can eat", that's not what's intended.
b. If taken literally, it means "all you can stuff into yourself"

So (a)+(b)

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself",that's not what's intended.

You need "which is" to avoid a comma splice. If you prefer, you can replace the commas with dashes and leave "that's".

 

[kadioguy]

I have decided that the sentence in question did indeed need a couple of changes. I have added two commas and a conjunction. (No dash.)

Hopefully, the revised sentence will meet your approval.

It's kind of you to reply me about that, Tarheel.
-----
While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", and that's not what's intended.
-----

Since the blue part is placed inside two commas, I am not sure if the "and" is necessary.
I think something placed inside two commas is like it being placed inside the quotation marks.

 

[Tarheel]

It's kind of you to reply to me about that, Tarheel.
-----
While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", and that's not what's intended.
-----

Since the blue part is placed inside two commas, I am not sure if the "and" is necessary.
I think something placed inside two commas is like placed inside the quotation marks.

Please note that we reply to something or someone. As for explaining why I inserted and where I did, that would take way too long and involve too much typing. I'm finished with that sentence.

 

[kadioguy]

1.

You need "which is" to avoid a comma splice. If you prefer, you can replace the commas with dashes and leave "that's".

But isn't "while" a conjunction?

=======
2.

a. While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", and that's not what's intended.

b. While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", that's not what's intended.


What is the difference in meaning between them? Could someone please help me?

 

[jutfrank]

There's no difference in meaning. What GoesStation is correctly saying is that it's not written properly if you use a comma, because it creates a comma splice. There are a few ways to correct that.

1) Start a new sentence.
2) Your original suggestion (in post #9) of a dash.
3) Insert and.
4) Replace that with which is, to create a relative clause.

 

[kadioguy]

You need "which is" to avoid a comma splice. If you prefer, you can replace the commas with dashes and leave "that's".

There's no difference in meaning. What GoesStation is correctly saying is that it's not written properly if you use a comma, because it creates a comma splice. There are a few ways to correct that.

1) Start a new sentence.
2) Your original suggestion (in post #9) of a dash.
3) Insert and.
4) Replace that with which is, to create a relative clause.

Thank you both. Now I know about it.

I should not see it as

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", that's not what's intended.

I should see it as

While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", that's not what's intended.

So the red comma is ungrammatical. We should change it to one of the following:

A. While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself"—that's not what's intended.

B. While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", and that's not what's intended.

C. While the phrase is "all you can eat", if taken literally it means "all you can stuff into yourself", which is not what's intended.

Am I right?

 

[GoesStation]

Yes, and the horse is still dead. (Look up the expression "beating a dead horse", then move on to a new topic.)