“Eavesdropping” vs “Listen in on”What is the difference between 'hear' and 'listen'?How often is the expression “get on well” used? Is there any difference with “get along”?
How badly should I try to prevent a user from XSSing themselves?
What is an equivalently powerful replacement spell for the Yuan-Ti's Suggestion spell?
How much mains leakage does an Ethernet connection to a PC induce, and what is the operating leakage path?
How can saying a song's name be a copyright violation?
Can compressed videos be decoded back to their uncompresed original format?
In Bayesian inference, why are some terms dropped from the posterior predictive?
Is there an expression that means doing something right before you will need it rather than doing it in case you might need it?
Is it a bad idea to plug the other end of ESD strap to wall ground?
Expand and Contract
Rotate ASCII Art by 45 Degrees
Are British MPs missing the point, with these 'Indicative Votes'?
How to travel to Japan while expressing milk?
Processor speed limited at 0.4 Ghz
Car headlights in a world without electricity
Could the museum Saturn V's be refitted for one more flight?
How to prevent "they're falling in love" trope
Is it possible to map the firing of neurons in the human brain so as to stimulate artificial memories in someone else?
Should I tell management that I intend to leave due to bad software development practices?
"the same as" in a sentence
meaning of 腰を落としている
What exactly is ineptocracy?
files created then deleted at every second in tmp directory
Placement of More Information/Help Icon button for Radio Buttons
What is required to make GPS signals available indoors?
“Eavesdropping” vs “Listen in on”
What is the difference between 'hear' and 'listen'?How often is the expression “get on well” used? Is there any difference with “get along”?
Is "Eavesdropping" and "Listening in on" different? and if they are in which context should I be using each expression?
listen in (on something) — phrasal verb with listen us /ˈlɪs·ən/ verb [ I ] to listen to someone's conversation when the person does not realize you are doing it:
She thinks her boss is listening in on her phone conversations.
eaves·drop
to secretly listen to a conversation.
"she opened the window just enough to eavesdrop on the conversation
outside"
word-usage
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
add a comment |
Is "Eavesdropping" and "Listening in on" different? and if they are in which context should I be using each expression?
listen in (on something) — phrasal verb with listen us /ˈlɪs·ən/ verb [ I ] to listen to someone's conversation when the person does not realize you are doing it:
She thinks her boss is listening in on her phone conversations.
eaves·drop
to secretly listen to a conversation.
"she opened the window just enough to eavesdrop on the conversation
outside"
word-usage
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
1
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago
add a comment |
Is "Eavesdropping" and "Listening in on" different? and if they are in which context should I be using each expression?
listen in (on something) — phrasal verb with listen us /ˈlɪs·ən/ verb [ I ] to listen to someone's conversation when the person does not realize you are doing it:
She thinks her boss is listening in on her phone conversations.
eaves·drop
to secretly listen to a conversation.
"she opened the window just enough to eavesdrop on the conversation
outside"
word-usage
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
Is "Eavesdropping" and "Listening in on" different? and if they are in which context should I be using each expression?
listen in (on something) — phrasal verb with listen us /ˈlɪs·ən/ verb [ I ] to listen to someone's conversation when the person does not realize you are doing it:
She thinks her boss is listening in on her phone conversations.
eaves·drop
to secretly listen to a conversation.
"she opened the window just enough to eavesdrop on the conversation
outside"
word-usage
word-usage
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
asked 2 days ago
KyleKyle
1,370318
1,370318
1
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago
add a comment |
1
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago
1
1
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
"Listen in" is like "take", while "eavesdrop" is like "steal". For example:
She took a pencil from her coworker's desk
Without context it's impossible to say whether she is taking the pencil illicitly, or taking it because it's convenient. But if you say:
She stole a pencil from her coworker's desk
she clearly knows she's doing something wrong.
In the same way, if you "listen in" on a conversation, you're not necessarily doing anything wrong. It mostly depends on whether the speakers know they are being overheard, or if they expect privacy. For example:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she listened in on the conversations around her. Particularly interesting was a young couple quietly fighting over a pile of unwashed dishes, which apparently one of them had promised to do some days ago.
In this context, "listen in" is slightly naughty, but since it's a public cafe there's not really any expectation that conversations will be private. However, if instead you wrote:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she eavesdropped on the conversations around her.
This is definitely naughty, as she knows the conversations are not meant for her ears, but she's listening anyway. Same context, different nuance.
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
add a comment |
They're very similar. I would say that eavesdropping always carries the connotation that the listener is doing something a little wrong; they haven't been invited to any part of the conversation.
Listen in on can have that negative inflection, but it can also refer to something more neutral: "I have my assistant listening in on this conference call to take notes."
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f203265%2feavesdropping-vs-listen-in-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
"Listen in" is like "take", while "eavesdrop" is like "steal". For example:
She took a pencil from her coworker's desk
Without context it's impossible to say whether she is taking the pencil illicitly, or taking it because it's convenient. But if you say:
She stole a pencil from her coworker's desk
she clearly knows she's doing something wrong.
In the same way, if you "listen in" on a conversation, you're not necessarily doing anything wrong. It mostly depends on whether the speakers know they are being overheard, or if they expect privacy. For example:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she listened in on the conversations around her. Particularly interesting was a young couple quietly fighting over a pile of unwashed dishes, which apparently one of them had promised to do some days ago.
In this context, "listen in" is slightly naughty, but since it's a public cafe there's not really any expectation that conversations will be private. However, if instead you wrote:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she eavesdropped on the conversations around her.
This is definitely naughty, as she knows the conversations are not meant for her ears, but she's listening anyway. Same context, different nuance.
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
add a comment |
"Listen in" is like "take", while "eavesdrop" is like "steal". For example:
She took a pencil from her coworker's desk
Without context it's impossible to say whether she is taking the pencil illicitly, or taking it because it's convenient. But if you say:
She stole a pencil from her coworker's desk
she clearly knows she's doing something wrong.
In the same way, if you "listen in" on a conversation, you're not necessarily doing anything wrong. It mostly depends on whether the speakers know they are being overheard, or if they expect privacy. For example:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she listened in on the conversations around her. Particularly interesting was a young couple quietly fighting over a pile of unwashed dishes, which apparently one of them had promised to do some days ago.
In this context, "listen in" is slightly naughty, but since it's a public cafe there's not really any expectation that conversations will be private. However, if instead you wrote:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she eavesdropped on the conversations around her.
This is definitely naughty, as she knows the conversations are not meant for her ears, but she's listening anyway. Same context, different nuance.
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
add a comment |
"Listen in" is like "take", while "eavesdrop" is like "steal". For example:
She took a pencil from her coworker's desk
Without context it's impossible to say whether she is taking the pencil illicitly, or taking it because it's convenient. But if you say:
She stole a pencil from her coworker's desk
she clearly knows she's doing something wrong.
In the same way, if you "listen in" on a conversation, you're not necessarily doing anything wrong. It mostly depends on whether the speakers know they are being overheard, or if they expect privacy. For example:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she listened in on the conversations around her. Particularly interesting was a young couple quietly fighting over a pile of unwashed dishes, which apparently one of them had promised to do some days ago.
In this context, "listen in" is slightly naughty, but since it's a public cafe there's not really any expectation that conversations will be private. However, if instead you wrote:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she eavesdropped on the conversations around her.
This is definitely naughty, as she knows the conversations are not meant for her ears, but she's listening anyway. Same context, different nuance.
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
"Listen in" is like "take", while "eavesdrop" is like "steal". For example:
She took a pencil from her coworker's desk
Without context it's impossible to say whether she is taking the pencil illicitly, or taking it because it's convenient. But if you say:
She stole a pencil from her coworker's desk
she clearly knows she's doing something wrong.
In the same way, if you "listen in" on a conversation, you're not necessarily doing anything wrong. It mostly depends on whether the speakers know they are being overheard, or if they expect privacy. For example:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she listened in on the conversations around her. Particularly interesting was a young couple quietly fighting over a pile of unwashed dishes, which apparently one of them had promised to do some days ago.
In this context, "listen in" is slightly naughty, but since it's a public cafe there's not really any expectation that conversations will be private. However, if instead you wrote:
Sitting alone in the cafe, she eavesdropped on the conversations around her.
This is definitely naughty, as she knows the conversations are not meant for her ears, but she's listening anyway. Same context, different nuance.
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
answered 2 days ago
AndrewAndrew
71.1k679155
71.1k679155
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
add a comment |
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
7
7
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
And to add a completely positive example. "New employee Sam was listening in on the customer call to gain an understanding of the process but she wasn't yet experienced enough to be an active participant"
– Richard Tingle
yesterday
2
2
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
Does this mean that when a law enforcement officer listens in via a wiretap, it's not eavesdropping if there is a warrant? I always considered "eavesdropping" to be in regards to the speakers' knowledge/consent rather than the legality of the listening in.
– Flater
yesterday
1
1
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
@Flater This really has little to do with any kind of absolute right or wrong, but rather what the writer wants to imply. If you write that the police "eavesdrop" on a conversation, it implies they're doing something wrong, even if it's for a good reason. In the grand scheme of things "eavesdropping" is not particularly naughty, much like a "little white lie".
– Andrew
yesterday
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
There's also "overhear". I would say if you were in a cafe or a train and heard what people around you were saying, without any special effort on your part, then you overheard them, you didn't eavesdrop.
– Michael Kay
21 hours ago
add a comment |
They're very similar. I would say that eavesdropping always carries the connotation that the listener is doing something a little wrong; they haven't been invited to any part of the conversation.
Listen in on can have that negative inflection, but it can also refer to something more neutral: "I have my assistant listening in on this conference call to take notes."
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
add a comment |
They're very similar. I would say that eavesdropping always carries the connotation that the listener is doing something a little wrong; they haven't been invited to any part of the conversation.
Listen in on can have that negative inflection, but it can also refer to something more neutral: "I have my assistant listening in on this conference call to take notes."
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
add a comment |
They're very similar. I would say that eavesdropping always carries the connotation that the listener is doing something a little wrong; they haven't been invited to any part of the conversation.
Listen in on can have that negative inflection, but it can also refer to something more neutral: "I have my assistant listening in on this conference call to take notes."
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
They're very similar. I would say that eavesdropping always carries the connotation that the listener is doing something a little wrong; they haven't been invited to any part of the conversation.
Listen in on can have that negative inflection, but it can also refer to something more neutral: "I have my assistant listening in on this conference call to take notes."
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
answered 2 days ago
KatyKaty
2,032415
2,032415
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f203265%2feavesdropping-vs-listen-in-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Please always include the source of dictionary definitions (or anything, really) you quote in your post. Thank you!
– userr2684291
2 days ago
Google "Emotive conjugation" ... "It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, You are eccentric, He is round the twist."
– Shane
2 days ago