Re: It's what It's

Subject: Re: It's what It's
From: David Neeley <dbneeley -at- oddpost -dot- com>
To: Isaac Rabinovitch <isaacr -at- mailsnare -dot- net>, TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 14:52:22 -0800 (PST)

Certainly not a moral issue. It still makes me cringe, though, when it is so often produced by writing and editing professionals.

Surely we will tend to give less scrutiny to what may be written quickly for an ephemeral email message. However, I am reminded of a motto from a training program my father came home with from a stint in Army Reserve summer camp about 45 or 50 years ago: "Practice does not make perfect unless you practice perfectly."

As for what is "incorrect" language, I find that those uses which are ambiguous and stand in the way of clarity should qualify as incorrect sans the "quotation marks."


-----Original Message from Isaac Rabinovitch <isaacr -at- mailsnare -dot- net>-----
"As with most "incorrect" language, it's not a moral failing. It's one of those mistakes
humans make."


Previous by Author: Re: Editing .pdfs - Continued
Next by Author: Re: It's what It's
Previous by Thread: RE: About mil/heavy industries documentation standards (short answer)
Next by Thread: Re: It's what It's

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

Sponsored Ads