CPF Board has come out to strongly deny that the government had quietly shifted the “retirement payout age” from 65 to 70, in a media report yesterday (20 Jan).

CPF Board’s denial came in response to a recent message circulating online. Someone had posted a picture of a mail he received from CPF Board, notifying him that if would like to receive his CPF payouts starting at 70 years old, he did not have to do anything. However, if he intends to receive his payouts starting at 65, he would still need to inform the CPF Board.

CPF Board told the media that the payout eligibility age for the Retirement Sum Scheme has not changed since it was announced in 2007.

“They can apply to start their payouts any time between the ages of 65 and 70. If they do not wish to start payouts before age 70, they need not do anything,” the CPF spokesman said. In other words, if members wish to start payouts before age 70, they need to do something about it – in this case, informing CPF Board to make the necessary changes.

The spokesman also said that the CPF Act was amended in 2016 to allow for this automatic payout arrangement, which took effect in Jan 2018. The automatic starting of payouts at age 70 “helps to simplify the activation process for members so they can start to enjoy a retirement income from their CPF savings,” the spokesman added.

Use of double negatives to be avoided

The official statement from the CPF spokesman – “If they do not wish to start payouts before age 70, they need not do anything” – actually constitutes a double negative statement.

Double negatives are two negative words used in the same sentence. Using two negatives turns the thought or sentence into a positive one. Double negatives are not encouraged in English because they are poor grammar and they can be confusing. They can be sometimes found in song lyrics and informal speeches but should be avoided in formal English sentences.

Oxford Dictionaries said that double negatives aren’t considered acceptable in current standard English and they should be avoided “in all but very informal situations”.

An article in BBC also noted that a double negative sentence usually causes more confusion for people.

“A double-negative sentence has one word which flips the meaning of the rest, and another which flips it right back again,” BBC explained. “But it usually causes more confusion when it is used than when it isn’t.”

VOA (Voice of America) Learning English also shared an article saying that English teachers generally do not like double negatives because they can be confusing and illogical.

“Starting in elementary school, teachers tell students to avoid them. But many native English speakers still use double negatives,” it said. It noted that politicians, lawyers and diplomats sometimes use double negatives in sensitive situations when they are speaking.

VOA shared that actually, English speakers have been using double negatives for centuries. But it was Robert Lowth who decided that the double negative had no place in English grammar.

Robert Lowth was a leader in the Church of England. In 1762, he wrote a book called A Short Introduction to English Grammar. Mr. Lowth proposed many restrictions on English grammar, many of them inspired by Latin. Over the years, his rules became the standard for teaching grammar all over the English-speaking world, VOA explained.

“But the double negative is alive and well, especially in informal speech,” it noted.

In any case, CPF Board is a government statutory board and not a political or diplomatic organization. It is set up to service the people. As such, it would be its duty to speak in a simple and direct manner in its communication to the pubiic. Double negatives in public statements should be avoided, as like many English experts have noted, they can cause confusion.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

The NCMP cat among the opposition pigeons

The opposition parties seem ruffled by changes to the NCMP scheme. Andrew loh & Khairulanwar Zaini.

安全宿舍再现病例,检测有漏网之鱼? 陈诗龙称冠病有潜伏期

近期,不少本来已被列为安全的客工宿舍,因出现新的冠病19确诊,再次被列为感染群。这包括:榜鹅S11宿舍、Cassia@Penjuru宿舍、大士南宿舍CDPL和克兰芝第一客工宿舍等。 回溯8月15日,人力部长杨莉明,曾在个人官方脸书发文,宣称客工宿舍已脱离“危机模式”。然而,直至本月5日,她又改口称“被列为安全宿舍,不代表不会再有人感染”。 然而,当所客工宿舍完成检测、被鉴定为安全。目前每日仍平均新增45例客工病例。其中有两巴仙的血清检测呈阳性,这意味着他们早前已受感染。 这是否意味着,目前的聚合酶链式反应(PCR)检测不够敏感? 不过总理公署部长、人力部兼贸工部第二部长陈诗龙,则解释,上述检测是探测人体冠病是否达一定含量,若客工在病毒潜伏期检测,可能病毒含量不足以被探测到。 在本月9日的跨部门记者会,陈诗龙如是反驳PCR检测下有漏网之鱼的说法,也强调上述测试是十分敏感的。但检测只能反映有关测试客工当下的情况,若在潜伏期、病毒含量不足,仍难以发现。 再者,也有部分患者无症状,当下无法被察觉。 当局目前仍每两周一次检测宿舍客工,若出现新增病例,则需封锁整座宿舍,并为所有人检测。而及早发现病例尤为重要,以能采取行动断开传播链。 陈诗龙也表示,迄今政府已成功遏止200座重现病例的宿舍内的疫情传播。而重新病例的数量也较少,约为少过10例。

总理起诉本社总编许渊臣

李显龙总理 起诉本社总编许渊臣。 本社总编许渊臣,在今午3时51分,收到代表总理李显龙的达文星律师楼( Davinder Singh Chambers LLC)寄来的原告诉状和法庭传票。 法庭传票,请许渊臣在下月15日,出席原告和被告双方的审前会议。 诉状中对本社英语站发表的有关文章提出异议,指该文章作出不实和无根据,并且贬低和诋毁总理。 本周日,李总理新闻秘书张俪霖,代表总理向本社总编许渊臣发函,指本社英语站在8月15日刊登的一篇评论,复述针对总理的不实指控,要求本社撤下并在三日内道歉。 对此,许渊臣在昨日致函总理答复。在信中,许渊臣强调,自己始终都是问责、透明和法治的忠实信徒;并认为有关评论文章不含诽谤性,而是根据可能对事件知情的总理家人此前发表的公开声明,也有鉴于涉及公共利益问题,为了能避免造成疑虑,只能重新复述总理弟妹曾说过的话。 对于总理新闻秘书信函第八段提出的要求,即立即移除有关文章,并在本月4日前无条件作出道歉,以及承诺不在《网络公民》刊登类似的指控,许渊臣则婉拒了这些要求。 许渊臣答复总理完整信函