There are some uses where eliminate would make sense and annihilate wouldn’t though. And vice versa. Like eliminating wasteful expenditures. Annihilate wouldn’t really work. So very similar words, but not a 1:1 substitution.
It may technically be correct, but the connotation is different. Annihilate suggests more violence or aggression, where eliminate likely does not in that context.
Its word choices like this that make writing sound strange when people use a thesaurus to try to add variety or to make something sound ‘smarter’.
Certain word choices can be more emotionally loaded, more likely to provoke certain thoughts or associations.
In some contexts eliminate would be violent and aggressive. If you eliminate a witness or eliminate competition it has a very different connotation to eliminating a bad habit for example.
Admittedly there can be variation in how people interpret word choice, but there are still differences between the two words.
When You Have annihilated the Impossible Whatever Remains, However Improbable, Must Be the Truth
There’s a difference between destroying something so it can never be true, and ruling it out through deductive reasoning why it can’t be true. There’s a greater opportunity to learn by dismissing something but leaving it intact.
Eliminate means to completely remove or get rid of something. Eliminations can be violent, but you could also be eliminated from a baking competition — aggression of the bakers themselves notwithstanding.
Annihilations are always violently destructive. I can’t think of a usage for annihilate that isn’t destructive that isn’t also an exaggeration.
Destruction does not necessarily mean fully gone, but annihilate and eliminate both have the same conotation yes.
There are some uses where eliminate would make sense and annihilate wouldn’t though. And vice versa. Like eliminating wasteful expenditures. Annihilate wouldn’t really work. So very similar words, but not a 1:1 substitution.
Annihilating wasteful expenditures is a perfectly acceptable thing to say, i dont think your example is correct.
It may technically be correct, but the connotation is different. Annihilate suggests more violence or aggression, where eliminate likely does not in that context.
Its word choices like this that make writing sound strange when people use a thesaurus to try to add variety or to make something sound ‘smarter’.
Certain word choices can be more emotionally loaded, more likely to provoke certain thoughts or associations.
In what way is eliminate not violent or aggressive?
In some contexts eliminate would be violent and aggressive. If you eliminate a witness or eliminate competition it has a very different connotation to eliminating a bad habit for example.
Admittedly there can be variation in how people interpret word choice, but there are still differences between the two words.
+1 to you, otherwise
When You Have annihilated the Impossible Whatever Remains, However Improbable, Must Be the Truth
There’s a difference between destroying something so it can never be true, and ruling it out through deductive reasoning why it can’t be true. There’s a greater opportunity to learn by dismissing something but leaving it intact.
Incorrect, annihilate means to utterly destroy.
Eliminate means to completely remove or get rid of something. Eliminations can be violent, but you could also be eliminated from a baking competition — aggression of the bakers themselves notwithstanding.
Annihilations are always violently destructive. I can’t think of a usage for annihilate that isn’t destructive that isn’t also an exaggeration.