--------------------
The First Party shall pay the ”Wage” of the Second Party on a monthly basis, of which the wage shall *consist of* base pay and benefits, as determined by the First Party.
2007-01-12 23:17:25 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
They don't have the same meaning:-
"consist of" implies that you are listing every single element of something. In your example, the wage is made up of base pay and benefits and nothing else.
"include" implies that you are listing some (but not all) of the elements. Again in your example, the wage is made up of base pay and benefits PLUS other items not specifically mentioned.
An alternative frequently seen in legal documents could be "comprises": "...the wage comprises base pay and benefits" which works like "consists of".
It can also be used like this: "...the wage comprises but is not limited to base pay and benefits" which works like "include".
2007-01-12 23:21:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about "consists of base pay, including, but not limited to, any and all benefits..." ?????
I never went to law school, but I've always been good at English grammar and I love to write. I also love logic problems and puzzles which are often very accurate in the details.
.
2007-01-13 07:31:06 · answer #2 · answered by OhWhatCanIDo 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you use "consist of" you are describing the make up of the wage, but if you use "include" you are describing additional items to be added to the basic wage.
2007-01-13 07:29:44 · answer #3 · answered by fredm65 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you say include, you mean you're talking about those items among OTHERS. If you say consist of you mean those are the basic items and that's all. There's a slight difference.
2007-01-13 07:38:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Include" is betetr sounding.
2007-01-13 07:20:59 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋