Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: fall short of

    • Join Date: Nov 2006
    • Posts: 7

    Smile fall short of

    Dear Teacher,

    I found the idiomatic phrase, "fall short of," is used with the specific numerical value. Is it appropriate to use "fall short of" to describe that some value does not reach a given point?
    i.e. It happens ... when the wavelength falls short of 300 nm...

    If so, in the above example, 300 nm is included or not?
    Does it happens when the wavelengh is 300 nm or 299 nm?

    If not appropriate, what is the better expression instead of "fall short of some value"?

    Thank you for your help.

  1. curmudgeon's Avatar
    Key Member
    Retired English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Mar 2006
    • Posts: 1,657

    Re: fall short of

    If it falls short of 300 then 299 is right. Similarly, less than 300 - If you want to include 300 then you would say 300 or less or 300 and below.

    • Join Date: Nov 2006
    • Posts: 7

    Re: fall short of

    Hi curmudgeon,

    Thank you for your reply.
    My question has been solved!

Similar Threads

  1. Short Words
    By layan in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-Nov-2006, 07:52
  2. suggestions for improvement short story
    By student2005 in forum Editing & Writing Topics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-Mar-2006, 06:50
  3. short of + noun/adj
    By MadHorse in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-Mar-2006, 16:33
  4. fall flat
    By welldone in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 31-May-2004, 18:54


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts