3 ms·
Doesn't "voted to x" imply that x was the result of the vote?
by sincerely 8y ago
Doesn't "voted to x" imply that x was the result of the vote?
- pvg 8y agoNo. It might seem like it because often the actor doing the voting is, for example, an entire legislative body. But that's not the case here.
- AJRF 8y agoIn the parlance of newspeak i've never seen it used any other way. Its misleading.
- brobdingnagians 8y agoAmbiguity of English language to logic in translation. `Congress voted to X` means that X is planned to be done. `I voted for X as President` does not mean that X is planning to be President.
- dragonwriter 8y agoNo, “A voted to Y” where A is a voter (or a subset of all voters) means “A cast its vote in support of position Y”, and doesn't say anything about the outcome of the vote. This is syntactically identical, though disambiguated by semantic context, from the same structure where A identifies the electorate rather than one or more voters that do not make up the whole of the electorate. In that case, “A votes to Y means that the electorate named held a vote in which Y was the winning alternative.” As this was a Tesla shareholder vote, “Blackrock voted to...” is an example of the first usage, while “Tesla shareholders voted to...” would be an example of the second.