Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Fighting over WordsLanguage and Civil Law Cases$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Roger W. Shuy

Print publication date: 2008

Print ISBN-13: 9780195328837

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: May 2008

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328837.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 25 May 2019

Competing Conveying System Advertisements

Competing Conveying System Advertisements

Dynamic Air v. Flexicon Corporation

Chapter:
(p.47) CHAPTER 5 Competing Conveying System Advertisements
Source:
Fighting over Words
Author(s):

Roger W. Shuy (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328837.003.0006

A manufacturer of a product that transports, processes, and packages bulk materials with a pneumatic process sued a competing manufacturer that uses a screw process using the latter company's advertising, which compared and evaluated the two methods, and charged that these advertisements constituted a deceptive trade practice. The plaintiff claimed that in these advertisements the defendant not only made false, misleading, and disparaging comments but also failed to reveal the industry data, studies, statistics, and other information that might substantiate its claims. Syntax analysis of these advertisements revealed that in these advertisements the verb tenses indicated that the defendant did not claim that comparisons with other types of conveyors were based on studies or tests. Semantic analysis of the word “ratings” conveys that this word indicates a subjective estimate or comparison, one not requiring research or tests. It also showed that the terms used in the comparisons (best, good, fair, poor, worst) are used regularly to indicate attitudes, beliefs, or dislikes, as opposed to the numerical, statistical measures of qualities that are used in reporting research findings.

Keywords:   deceptive trade practice, conveyance system, advertisements, syntax, semantic, estimate, comparisons, beliefs, research

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .