Confusing use of 'up to'
You can cancel the tickets up to thirty minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.
Is the use of 'up to'semantically correct? Or, is 'at least' more appropriate to replace 'up to'?
Should it be rewritten to make the sense clearer in following manner?
You can cancel the tickets any time but at least thirty minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.
Yes, "up to" is ambiguous if taken literally. Those who would argue otherwise fail to see that their understanding is predicated on their knowledge of the context of the statement.
Take for instance, the following two sentences which use "up to" for diametrically opposing representations of time:
-
You can cancel the tickets up to thirty minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.
-
EA Play access is usually granted up to 1 week before release.
In the first example, "up to" means "as late as". In the second example, "up to" means "as early as".
In the first, "up to" and "before" denote the minimum amount of time before the event (30 minutes). In the second, the same words "up to" and "before" denote the maximum amount of time before the event (1 week).
"As late as" and "as early as" are just as succinct as "up to" and they have the added advantage of being unambiguous. Unfortunately, "up to" is used more often.
You can cancel the tickets up to thirty minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.
Here "up to" means time going forwards or "until".
You can cancel the tickets any time but at least thirty minutes before the scheduled departure of the train.
Which is it? "any time" or "at least thirty minutes before"? It says one thing then immediately contradicts itself. People don't always have time to struggle through complex grammar when they need an answer to the question "Can I cancel my ticket right now?" This is a real world problem, not a thought experiment. The simplest grammar is preferable.