Misuse of the "Grain of Salt" Metaphor

[ezz_bee]

I'm not usually one to nit-pick articles posted on RR (we all make speling and grammar, mistakes.), but there is one I feel that I need to address. I can't remember which writer(s), but I've read a few articles now that misuse the "grain of salt" metaphor. An example is something along the lines of, "...keep in mind this is summer league, so the results should be taking with a mountain of salt." In the example above "mountain" is substituted for "grain" for the purpose of hyperbole. However, this implies that the reader should put a lot of belief into the preceding statement, not less, which is the writer's implied position (I think).

A correct hyperbolic use of the phrase, would use something smaller like, "...keep in mind this is summer league, so the results so should be taken with a molecule of salt". You could use different parallels at the atomic or sub-atomic levels ("take it with a quark of an atom of a molecule of a grain of salt...") if you wanted. The general idea is that you need to go smaller not bigger to create more emphasis.

Not trying to be a jerk, just a small thing that I've seen a few times.

[DanH]

I'm not usually one to nit-pick articles posted on RR (we all make speling and grammar, mistakes.), but there is one I feel that I need to address. I can't remember which writer(s), but I've read a few articles now that misuse the "grain of salt" metaphor. An example is something along the lines of, "...keep in mind this is summer league, so the results should be taking with a mountain of salt." In the example above "mountain" is substituted for "grain" for the purpose of hyperbole. However, this implies that the reader should put a lot of belief into the preceding statement, not less, which is the writer's implied position (I think).

A correct hyperbolic use of the phrase, would use something smaller like, "...keep in mind this is summer league, so the results so should be taken with a molecule of salt". You could use different parallels at the atomic or sub-atomic levels ("take it with a quark of an atom of a molecule of a grain of salt...") if you wanted. The general idea is that you need to go smaller not bigger to create more emphasis.

Not trying to be a jerk, just a small thing that I've seen a few times.

I'm not sure this is right either. The origins of the phrase don't seem tied directly to the amount of salt. I disagree that going smaller is the correct way to emphasize the sentiment. I don't think there's any correct way to further emphasize skepticism using that phrasing.

Although you could come to the conclusion that more salt is indeed more skepticism. It's a stretch, but I see no way to conclude that less salt equals more skepticism.

[white men can't jump]

Yeah, I'm not sure this is right either.

The expression comes from the idea of using salt for the purpose of making something easier to swallow.

In usage, the expression is tied to this, thus if something seems hard to fully accept (or swallow) and that you should be skeptical, you take it with a grain of salt. So using more or less salt should be tied to how fully you accept the idea. The more skeptical you are, the farther it is from fully acceptable (harder to swallow), and the more salt you need to make up for the lack of substance to the idea. The less skeptical, the closer it is to fully acceptable (easier to swallow), and the less salt you need. The use of salt basically meaning accepting with reservations, and thus adding hyperbole to the amount of salt reflects more/less reservations.

Do we have an English scholar somewhere around here?

[raptors999]

The irony