Reader question:
Please explain “set in stone” in this sentence: The rules of the game are set in stone.
My comments:
The rules are the rules, and they must be followed to the letter.
In other words, there’s no getting around them.
In a sports game, for example, all players and coaches must adhere to the rulebook unconditionally. Any time anyone breaks one of the rules, they’re punished accordingly.
In basketball, for instance, a player is not allowed to hit another player on the wrist or elbow while they shoot for a basket. If he does, a call will be called by the referee and the shooter is awarded with two free throws.
Or three free throws if he is attempting a three-pointer while being fouled.
This is something that happens again and again. Any such fouls are treated the same way, as in accordance with the rules which, as stated above, are “set in stone”.
Set in stone?
Yes, like the words are carved out on a piece of stone. And words that are carved out on a piece of stone will be permanent, irremovable. You can remove words written with a pencil on a piece of paper, but you can’t erase words that are carved in stone.
And words were literally carved in stone in ancient times, of course, as USDitionary.com explains:
The phrase “set in stone” has its origins in ancient times when important laws, treaties, and religious texts were literally inscribed on stone or clay tablets. This was done not only for durability but also to signify the permanent and unchangeable nature of the text.
One of the most famous examples of this is the Code of Hammurabi, an ancient Babylonian law code dating back to around 1754 BC, which was inscribed on a large stone stele. Similarly, the Ten Commandments in the Bible were said to be written on stone tablets.
See?
Rules that are set in stone are therefore unalterable.
The “set” in “set in stone”, by the way, is similar in meaning to “set” in “set in one’s way”. A lot of old people, for example, are set in their way. They have their way of doing things and are rigid and stubborn. They stick to their views, habits and routines. They’re not open to new ideas. They’re resistant to change – often to a fault, of course.
But they’re old and, truth be told, they all probably have their reason to be set in their way. Let’s make allowances for them and cut them some slack.
Here, then, are recent media examples of things that are set or not set in stone:
1. People who quit smoking, even at the ripe age of 75, could be boosting their life expectancy, according to new research.
The findings suggest it is never too late to make healthy lifestyle choices.
Public health scientists at the University of Michigan (U-M) say their research supports the “profoundly important assessment that quitting smoking is the single best thing people can do to enhance their life expectancy.”
That knowledge could seriously motivate people who have been smoking their whole lives, and who may have resigned themselves to a long-term elevated risk of cancer or cardiovascular disease.
One study of nearly 13,000 middle-aged men found those smoking 30 or more cigarettes a day at the start of the investigation faced a 21 percent greater risk of dying over the following 25 years.
But these risks are not set in stone. Numerous studies have found that quitting smoking at any age is followed by short-term health benefits, and researchers at U-M have now found the long-term benefits are not just limited to young and middle-aged adults who quit.
Their estimates suggest that people between the ages of 35 and 75, who used to smoke in the past, have added considerable time back to their life expectancy by giving up cigarettes.
Using publicly available, nationally representative health data, the team performed a series of calculations to estimate the average number of years lost due to smoking and the average years gained by quitting smoking at various ages.
The quitting ages considered were 35, 45, 55, 65, and 75.
The life expectancy of those who quit was compared to those who kept smoking at these specific ages and those who had never smoked at these ages, and these estimates were graphed based on probability.
Compared to those who never smoked, individuals who smoked at age 35 and continued smoking throughout the remainder of their lives were predicted to lose about 9 years of life on average (23 percent of their total life expectancy).
By contrast, people who stopped smoking at age 35 only had about a year difference between their life expectancy and that of those who never smoked. In other words, they had regained, on average, about 8 years of expected life.
The findings are supported by a previous study from researchers in Canada and Norway, which found that if a person can stop smoking for a decade, they can potentially avert a decade of life lost. But even at older ages there were benefits to life expectancy.
The current research agrees. Individuals who smoked at age 75 and who continued for the rest of their lives were predicted to lose about 4.4 years of life on average (nearly 50 percent of their life expectancy at this age).
Based on probability curves, however, the chances of gaining at least 1 year of life among those who quit smoking at age 65 and 75 are 23 percent and 14 percent, respectively. And that’s nothing to scoff at.
- Quitting Smoking Even at 75 Can Increase Life Expectancy, Study Finds, ScienceAlert.com, October 10, 2024.
2. Addison Rae does not want to star as Britney Spears in the singer's forthcoming biopic. Though Rae is a Spears superfan, she says “no one” truly deserves to play the princess of pop on-screen.
“I honestly don’t think anyone deserves to play her. She’s such an enigma and such an icon,” the musician and dancer recently told iHeart Radio’s The Hit List, before addressing the frequent comparisons between herself and Spears. “I don’t even think it’s right to compare me to her at all. I think she really, really created something that is untouchable and so in its own lane that nobody will ever truly be able to replicate what she did for music, and even the entertainment industry.”
Rae’s Britney Spears fandom runs deep, and she told The Hit List that she wants the singer herself to be the guiding force in casting an actor to fictionally step into her shoes, not fan desires or media speculation. “I support anything and everything that Britney Spears ever wants to do in her life and career, and I think she’ll have the best opinion on who she thinks that should be,” Rae said.
News of a Britney Spears biopic dropped earlier this summer, after Wicked director Jon M. Chu and Universal pictures landed the rights to her bestselling memoir The Woman in Me. It’s common pop culture knowledge that Addison Rae is a fan of the singer’s book; she was famously pictured (and memed) reading it while on a walk, and her pal Troye Sivan paid homage to the moment with his 2024 Halloween costume.
While a plethora of names have been tossed around to potentially play Spears, nothing has been set in stone casting-wise yet. Way back in 2022, Millie Bobby Brown called Spears her “dream” role. “Just growing up in the public eye, watching her videos, watching interviews of her when she was younger… I feel like I could tell her story in the right way,” she told Drew Barrymore at the time. We’ll just have to wait and see.
- Addison Rae Says ‘No One’ Deserves to Play Britney Spears in the Singer’s Upcoming Biopic, TeenVogue.com, November 22, 2024.
3. A wheelchair-bound Harvey Weinstein begged a New York judge on Wednesday to put him on trial earlier than planned because he isn’t sure he will live until the spring while incarcerated in the “hell hole” that he said is the New York City jail complex.
“Every day I’m at Rikers Island it’s a mystery to me how I’m still walking,” Weinstein told the court while seated in a wheelchair. “I’m asking and begging you your honor. I can’t hold on anymore. I’m holding on because I want justice for myself and I want this to be over with.”
Weinstein is scheduled to stand trial April 15. Judge Curtis Farber said he could not make it earlier because he is scheduled to preside over a murder trial that is “set in stone.” Weinstein persisted.
“I beg you to switch your case and do so out of clemency,” Weinstein said. “I don't know how much longer I can hold on.”
Weinstein complained the conditions he is subjected to in jail are complicating his medical issues, calling Rikers “a medieval situation.”
“I’m begging the court to move your date so we can have that date instead and proceed with this trial as quickly as we can and get out of this hell hole,” Weinstein said.
The disgraced film producer asked to start the trial even a bit earlier, April 7, because, he said, “every week counts.” Farber said he would consider it.
“If the lawyers report to me they can do it sooner then I’ll make myself available,” Farber said.
Farber on Wednesday denied Weinstein's bid to dismiss a new sexual assault charge from a woman who alleged Weinstein forced oral sex in a Manhattan hotel in 2006. Weinstein argued prosecutors unduly delayed charging him.
“The application to dismiss denied,” Farber said. “The court has inspected the grand jury minutes and found them to be sufficient.”
- Harvey Weinstein begs to get out of his ‘hell hole’ to judge in NYC, ABC7NY.com, January 30, 2025.
本文仅代表作者本人观点，与本网立场无关。欢迎大家讨论学术问题，尊重他人，禁止人身攻击和发布一切违反国家现行法律法规的内容。
About the author:
Zhang Xin is Trainer at chinadaily.com.cn. He has been with China Daily since 1988, when he graduated from Beijing Foreign Studies University. Write him at: zhangxin@chinadaily.com.cn, or raise a question for potential use in a future column.
（作者：张欣）
