to entail vs to imply

[auspex]

Hi there,

could anyone explain to me what is exactly the difference between these to verbs and whether they can be interchangeable ?

This is the context:

The new changes entail a security issue
The new changes imply a security issue

Are they both correct ?, does the meaning change using one or the other?

Thanks in advance

 

[Chris K]

The best verb would be pose.

 

[horsewishr]

The best verb would be pose.

Hmm. I think your interpretation points out the fact that the intention of both phrases is unclear.

This is the way I see it:

The new changes entail a security issue>> Security issues WILL be addressed as a part of the new changes (which are about to be implemented).

The new changes imply a security issue>> The changes (that have already been made) suggest that there was (previously) a security problem.

Your suggestion could be equally valid, depending on what the original poster really wants to say.

 

[auspex]

Ok, I'll try to redefine the example using different words:

The new changes will introduce security flaws into the software.

So, can I use "to entail" or "to imply" in the way I said before?

"The new changes entail/imply security issues"

Thanks

 

[Chris K]

Ok, I'll try to redefine the example using different words:

The new changes will introduce security flaws into the software.

So, can I use "to entail" or "to imply" in the way I said before?

"The new changes entail/imply a security issue"

Thanks

"To imply" would not be correct, as it means, roughly, "to provide evidence of/for." "Entail" is better but still not completely clear. "Pose" or "will introduce" are fine.

 

[auspex]

So the sentence: "The new changes pose security flaws", is correct ?

Never used "to pose" with that meaning

Thanks Chris

 

[Chris K]

So the sentence: "The new changes pose security flaws", is correct ?

Never used "to pose" with that meaning

Thanks Chris

I would probably say "pose security issues." Flaws are caused or introduced, but issues are posed.