RE: ambiguous sentences

Subject: RE: ambiguous sentences
From: eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 16:38:40 -0400

Firstly I wonder what the relevance of all this is to the list.

Be that as it may, all of these 'sentences' stink of the same yuck that many
philosophy paradoxes do. They require a suspension of common sence before they
can be interpreted as the presenter desires.

Let's face it. All of the sentences suck. As they fail to clearly communicate,
regardless of what some class in the theory of linguistics might say, they
should not appear in any tech docs.

Eric L. Dunn

Buy ComponentOne Doc-To-Help 6.0, the most powerful SINGLE SOURCE HELP
AUTHORING TOOL for MS Word. SAVE $100 on the full version and $50 on the
upgrade. Offer ends 10/31/2002 (code: DTH102250).

All-new RoboHelp X3 is now shipping! Get single sourcing, print-quality
documentation, conditional text and much more, in the most monumental
release ever. Save $100! Order online at

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: HOTTEST TOOLS MAN!
Next by Author: RE: Yahoo has no staff tech writers
Previous by Thread: Re: ambiguous sentences
Next by Thread: RE: ambiguous sentences

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads