Thine Editor Appeareth!pipisafoatDecember 28 2009, 22:59:59 UTC
An excellent article for an all-too-frequent problem! It looks pretty well-written overall, but let's see what sort of improvements we can bring about
( ... )
Re: Thine Editor Appeareth!pipisafoatDecember 28 2009, 23:00:57 UTC
(continued, sorry to be so long-winded)
Now, there are a couple places I would consider changing the wording:
Okay, fine, I'll explain it further, and even teach you a trick so that you can do it without even thinking about the underlying grammar. Because there is not a subject after the and, you need to remove the comma immediately preceding it.
"Who" a relative pronoun. "Who" is a relative pronoun.
Like the personal pronoun, the relative pronoun changes based on whether it is a subject or an object. If it is used as a subject, it is who. If it is used as an object, it is whom. There are just an awful lot of "it is"s around here. I would contract some of them to create a mixture of "it is"s and "it's"s.
The only thing to remember is that it is the relative pronoun's use within the clause that determines whether it is who or whom. Reword for easier accessibility for nonnative speakers/further clarity: The only thing to remember is that the relative pronoun's use within the clause is what determines whether it is who or whom.
Re: Thine Editor Appeareth!mister_troperJanuary 2 2010, 17:21:54 UTC
"I am a fan of keeping the examples similar throughout the article, as you did, but I would mix it up enough to avoid this confusion."
What if I string them into their own narrative? I could even set out the whole article with the story that then breaks down. Would that work to keep things together, or just add another level of confusion?
"Because the present and past tense of "to hit" look so similar, I would recommend using another verb to demonstrate."
This is why it's always so interesting. In an earlier draft I considered this, but then drew the opposite conclusion, that framing things in a sentence where things otherwise changed as little as possible was better, in a sort of "controlled experiment" sense.
"First of all, I wouldn't use an incorrect example anywhere in an informative article...It would be more helpful to readers to explain that rather than use an incorrect example."
Ah, that's a very good point that I will carry forth.
Pinch Hitting Edittigerstriped86December 30 2009, 03:06:42 UTC
Howdy! I'm pinch hitting your second edit for your library lit article and you've asked for all the barrels, so I'll throw as many as I can at you Donkey-Kong style
( ... )
Re: Pinch Hitting Edittigerstriped86January 26 2010, 07:29:11 UTC
Looking it over again makes what I felt the first time even more convoluted in my own mind.
Perhaps its taking my intelligence for granted, perhaps that its so rule based that I feel alienated from the piece altogether or perhaps its just a personal style of writing that doesn't clique with me.
In any case, its a very well done and thought out article on something that most people simply would not rather deal with and would rather be wrong than corrected.
That being said, I wish I could offer more insight but I'm going more on gut here than anything.
Comments 7
Reply
Now, there are a couple places I would consider changing the wording:
Because there is not a subject after the and, you need to remove the comma immediately preceding it.
"Who" is a relative pronoun.
There are just an awful lot of "it is"s around here. I would contract some of them to create a mixture of "it is"s and "it's"s.
Reword for easier accessibility for nonnative speakers/further clarity: The only thing to remember is that the relative pronoun's use within the clause is what determines whether it is who or whom.
Reply
Reply
What if I string them into their own narrative? I could even set out the whole article with the story that then breaks down. Would that work to keep things together, or just add another level of confusion?
"Because the present and past tense of "to hit" look so similar, I would recommend using another verb to demonstrate."
This is why it's always so interesting. In an earlier draft I considered this, but then drew the opposite conclusion, that framing things in a sentence where things otherwise changed as little as possible was better, in a sort of "controlled experiment" sense.
"First of all, I wouldn't use an incorrect example anywhere in an informative article...It would be more helpful to readers to explain that rather than use an incorrect example."
Ah, that's a very good point that I will carry forth.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Perhaps its taking my intelligence for granted, perhaps that its so rule based that I feel alienated from the piece altogether or perhaps its just a personal style of writing that doesn't clique with me.
In any case, its a very well done and thought out article on something that most people simply would not rather deal with and would rather be wrong than corrected.
That being said, I wish I could offer more insight but I'm going more on gut here than anything.
Wishing you all the best!
-tiger
Reply
Leave a comment