Basic Rules number 3

Subject: Basic Rules number 3
From: Beverly Parks <bparks -at- HUACHUCA-EMH1 -dot- ARMY -dot- MIL>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 1994 06:51:08 MST

> On Wed, 21 Dec 1994, Beverly Parks wrote:

>>Hi, Chris. I liked your Golden Rules until I got to rule 3. This
>>seems to allow the writing to be consistently, grammatically
>>INCORRECT. Why not make it grammatically correct, then

> Chris Benz responded:

> Hmm, I think you're the first person who didn't like on e of the
> first three rules. Everyone seems to hang on #4.

> Anyway: Because grammatical correctness can get in the way of
> understandability. Consistency rarely does. This reminds me of
> Winston Churchill's response to being reprimanded for not
> following the "Don't end a sentence with a preposition" rule:

> "That is the most ridiculous thing of which I have ever heard."


It's possible I was being either too literal or too pedantic
(I've been guilty of both in the past). To me, rule 3 says that
if you ignore grammatical correctness in one instance in order
to make something more understandable, then, when that
grammatical construct arises again, you must continue to make it
incorrect in order to be consistent.

It's early. I can't help it. :)

Beverly Parks
bparks -at- huachuca-emh1 -dot- army -dot- mil

Previous by Author: Documenting Object Oriented Class Library
Next by Author: e-mail or email or E-Mail?
Previous by Thread: Re: Trigger
Next by Thread: e-mail or email or E-Mail?

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

Sponsored Ads