Better Writing

  • GilaMonster (1/23/2014)


    djackson 22568 (1/23/2014)


    Jim P. (1/23/2014)


    Steve Jones - SSC Editor (1/22/2014)


    If I make mistakes most days, then I'd like to hear about it, though I'd prefer the common courtesy of sending me a note rather than ridiculing me here.

    A suggested lesson for any site, not just SSC.

    I have more than once taken the time to do a quick cut and paste into an e-mail-- the suggested change. Typed the recipient's email and hit send.

    Remember: "Praise in Public, Correct in Private"

    A great way to handle it, but sometimes, when done properly and without malice, it is beneficial to point it out to the group inside the thread. For example, if someone wrote instructions on how to perform a task and said "make sure to ..." when they meant "make sure NOT to ...", correcting that thread might prevent someone from later using it and causing a loss of data. Those instances are probably not all that common though.

    I have a bad habit of switching 'or' and 'of' in a sentence. It's very hard for me to see that I've done it and it often results in a grammatically correct sentence, so Word's grammar check doesn't flag it. It can completely change the meaning of the sentence however...

    I haven't noticed - the fact that you have is important though. You don't need my encouragement, and I hope this doesn't sound patronizing, but since you know, eventually you should get better at it. You recognize it, you are open about it, and I bet you still try to improve.

    On the other side is a I guy knew who wrote (or attempted to write) C code. He couldn't get the "If x == 5" sentax correct to save his life, more often writing "If x = 5". About once every couple days we would hear him getting frustrated. Eventually after it escalated to where nobody else could work, we would go over to help. We explained that the easiest way to fix most of his issues was to put the constant on the left. That way when he wrote "If 5 = x", the compiler would tell him.

    He refused, saying it didn't look right. Most of us had little respect for him because he wouldn't admit his error, nor try to fix it, nor take advice that would have fixed it.

    For those who aren't clear on the example, in C and C++ a single equals sign is the assignment operator, which gets evaluated first. Therefore the expression "if x = 5" will ALWAYS be true. The double equals signs is the comparison operator. Lastly, who want to point out my grammer errors in this paragraph?

    Dave

  • steve.neumann (1/22/2014)


    this article made me laugh. there is rarely a day where you do not have some sort of grammatical mistake etc. there's even one here...

    ..."and possibly impress someone else that could offer you a job. " 'that' should be 'who', as it is a person not a thing...

    Where does it state 'that' can not refer to a person...?

    That - pronoun, plural those - Used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as pointed out or present, mentioned before, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis

  • Dale Turley (1/24/2014)


    "someone else that could offer you a job. " 'that' should be 'who', as it is a person not a thing...

    Where does it state 'that' can not refer to a person...?

    That - pronoun, plural those - Used to indicate a person, thing, idea, state, event, time, remark, etc., as pointed out or present, mentioned before, supposed to be understood, or by way of emphasis

    I am not the expert, but from the books I have read about common grammar issues, using "who" appears to me to be more correct. I wonder if there are times where "that" is OK, and others where it is not? For example, "That person is cool" would be correct. I think on that one point the poster was accurate.

    Dave

  • I'm with you, Dale. Convention has "who" listed as more likely, but both apply:

    http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/11204/how-to-use-who-vs-that

Viewing 4 posts - 46 through 48 (of 48 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply