Highly occupational

"In our world, the moving picture world", said film director Jason Judd in Agatha Christie's The Mirror Crack'd from Side to Side, "marriage is a fully occupational hazard".

All right, just as hitting a finger with a hammer is a hazard faced by a carpenter, or a crash into the straw bales or the wall of tyres is a hazard to a racing driver, so marriage could be said cynically to be a hazard among film stars.

Now a hit on the thumb may be a less fearsome risk than crashing a racing car; so you could perhaps say that the carpenter's hazard is 'less severe' than that of the racing driver. But can you say that the hazard of the carpenter is only 'slightly occupational', while the racing driver's hazard - or even the film star's hazard - is somehow 'fully occupational' ?

No. You can have degrees of severity, but not degrees of occupationality (if there is such a word*).

We shouldn't blame Dame Agatha for that, though. The solecism is in the mouth of one of her characters, and 'fully occupational' may be the very thing a bloke like him would have said.

On the other hand, the dozen or so instances in the same book of the phrase 'St John's Ambulance' occur mainly in Christie's paragraphs of narrative - and we all know that's wrong, don't we ?**

* There is now: I've just used it.

** The correct title is St John Ambulance.

Highly occupational