The One Off Meltdown

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Sean,

Many thanks for posting a great example ("that one off chance" meaning a single unusual - but not unique - chance) the premise for which is syntactically the same as someone stating that hitting his wife would not happen again because it was "a one off instance". Of course, James Maybrick in the James Maybrick scrapbook did exactly that and - by it, as I have stated many times and been roundly mocked for doing so - he could have meant "a one 'off' instance". If one is permitted to type (and then publish) an 'off chance' in 1883, why is one not also permitted to write an 'off instance' in 1888? I can answer my own question, of course, which is that - to agree to this premise - one's argument around the evidence for a hoax falls immediately away and that is not to be permitted around these here parts.

So, it may well be (though we still don't know for certain) that the expression "one-off instance" was impossible in 1888, but can we still say - in all seriousness - that the expression "one 'off' instance" was also impossible in 1888 given its syntactic equivalent used at least as early as six years beforehand?

Obviously, we all know what's coming - the denial of the possibility of syntactic equivalence (probably via lengthy posts deconstructing the term 'syntactic equivalence' - as if my choice of terminology has any bearing whatsoever on the truthfulness of the premise) from all the usual suspects (well, the two of them) so I shan't be engaging in the to-and-fro and the dance moves of making something possible appear quite impossible. I've made my point, and I'm not sure I have anything to add to it after your generous identification of the very thing I would have been looking for had I arsed myself to (and certainly not whilst simultaneously watching Celtic versus St. Mirren now that the Scottish season has started).

I'll just end by reminding everyone of something which I think Caz first noted - namely, that if the expression used in the scrapbook was meant to convey "a one-off instance" then it is immediately followed by a tautology as the next claim is (the equivalent of) "Never to be repeated" - whereas no such tautology leads from "a one 'off' instance" as it is a claim that the instance was simply unusual or out-of-character rather than necessarily 'unique'. So James Maybrick writing that hitting his wife was nothing but an abhorrent instance fits perfectly with his following claim that it will not happen again. If you don't like his use of "a one", by the way, you should spend more time in northern England where it is perfectly common to create redundancy by using the two words together. My own mother used it all her life. If I said to her (as I frequently did), "Would you like a cup of tea, Mam?", she'd say to me, "Yes, I would love a one". I take it that a Scouser in the nineteenth century may well have been no different to a Geordie in the twentieth century in this respect (and - even if you don't accept such redundancy as being a common feature of northern dialects, I would remind you all that this was just someone writing and not all appropriate literary conventions can be assumed of someone writing their thoughts as they come to them).

So thank you for that, Sean. Anyone old enough to remember, for example, the certain fact that Michael Maybrick did not write lyrics? That didn't age well, now did it? And yet it was commonly trumpeted as all the evidence we all needed in order to know the scrapbook was a hoax. As usual, the 'killer blow' that exposes the hoax falls apart under a little scrutiny (but watch out for the frantic spluttering of the naysaying classes - any moment now...).

Ike

An 'off chance" is a long-established noun in the English dictionary, Ike, going back to the 1830s:

https://www.oed.com/dictionary/off-chance_n?tl=true

There is no such thing, however, as an "off instance" and never has been:

https://www.oed.com/search/dictionar...q=off+instance

That's the difference.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Oxford English Dictionary cites the earliest use of 'off chance' to Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle in 1839. This origin would tend to link the use of the phrase to gambling slang.

On the other hand the phrase 'off instance', well the OED has 0 results for "off instance".

Exactly Sean. It doesn’t exist. It’s an invention.

[Lombro2]

Two more examples of wrong for the right reason and right for the wrong reason.

I’ll take the former. And I got lots of battery power on my phone this time and I’m not multi-tasking too much. So I’m not at a disadvantage like last time.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Two more examples of wrong for the right reason and right for the wrong reason.

I’ll take the former. And I got lots of battery power on my phone this time and I’m not multi-tasking too much. So I’m not at a disadvantage like last time.

Except that this thread is a classic example of how to get it wrong for all the wrong reasons.

[The Baron]

Just sitting here grinning at how perfectly natural and old the phrase “one off instance” really is.

Like I knew it felt right when I wrote it.. rhythmically, structurally, semantically.. but I went digging, and what did I find? Two beautiful examples from the 1880s, just sitting there, already doing the work.


1885, Journal of the Royal United Service Institution:
“…and not against one off chance which may never happen…”

1883, At Fault:
“…just that one off chance, they may be rolled over.”

Same phrase. Same cadence. Same meaning.
One rare, unpredictable, fleeting moment.. a chance that stands apart from the rest. A “one off chance.” You read it, and your brain just gets it. No friction. No footnotes needed.

So now let’s talk about “one off instance.”

The structure? Identical.
The meaning? Identical.
The vibe? Fully intact.

The moment you look at them side by side.. “one off chance”, “one off instance”.. it’s like linguistic twins. Same build, same mood, same role in the sentence.

They share the same skeleton.. “one” (a singular event), “off” (something apart, irregular), and a noun to carry the idea.. chance, instance, take your pick.

Both phrases point to that one blip, that rare flicker, that moment that doesn’t repeat.. and the language carries it without any confusion.

If someone in 1883 could say “one off chance” and mean a singular, almost never kind of possibility, then “one off instance” fits right in.. no stretch, no leap, no invention. It’s not new. It’s not reaching. It’s just English doing what English always does.. combining familiar parts into clear, expressive meaning.

And it’s kind of thrilling to see it. Not just that “one off instance” is valid.. but that the logic behind it has been alive for more than a century. No need to justify it. Just need to enjoy it.

So yes, I will keep using one off instance with even more joy now.. backed by the 1880s, blessed by rhythm, and completely at home in the language.

Because it works. Because it sings.
And because it’s always been waiting there, one off chance at a time.



The Baron