Re: The Importance of "The"

Subject: Re: The Importance of "The"
From: "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- granatedit -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Sat, 24 Apr 2004 22:47:34 -0400


Mark Baker wrote:
> Bonnie Granat wrote:
>
>>> Can anybody provide an eloquent argument (maybe an
>>> online article) for including definite articles in
>>> procedures?
>>>
>>
>> It's not eloquent, but here's something: writing came into
existence
>> for one reason only. That reason is the bedrock on which all
writing
>> must continue to stand.
>>
>> That is, writing represents *speech.* It stands for speech. Writing
>> is not code, or shorthand, or a test of one's ingenuity. It is a
>> substitute for human speech.
>
> That argument is a double edged sword to say the least. Speech is
> significantly less formal than writing. To argue that written
> communication should follow speech is likely to lead to losing a lot
> of arguments in the future, even if it wins this one, which is far
> from certain. A lot of "connector" words get omitted in speech.
>

I'm not arguing that it should "follow speech," but rather that the
elementary rules of the language should be observed if the intention
is to communicate.

>
> The former is not in anyway ambiguous and the argument that such a
> construct could be ambiguous in some contexts is not compelling.
Lots
> of constructs could be ambiguous under certain circumstances.
> Avoiding them all would be tedious at best, and probably lead to
> prose that was awkward and unnatural (as the overzealous application
> of grammatical purity often does.) Formal ambiguity abounds in
> English. It is both normal and correct to rely on context to resolve
> it. The point is to avoid actual ambiguity in the present case, not
> all possibility of ambiguity in the theoretical case.
>

Readers should not have to take extra time to figure out prose that
uses no articles.

> The latter, however, is unlikely to slow anyone down significantly,
> if at all. How long does it take to read "Remove the lower bracket"
> compared to the time it takes to actually remove the lower bracket?
> The most compelling argument (to an engineer) might be to point out
> that they are optimizing the wrong part of the system.
>

Indeed, what slows people down is the irregular use of the language.

> Both forms are commonly seen (and heard). In short, it's a wash. My
> advice to Scott is to save his ammunition for a more important
fight.
>

This is the fight he is having. It must be worthy enough for him to
have posted about it, so I am not likely to try to tell him he's wrong
to want to resolve the issue. Who am I to tell someone what is or is
not important? Only he can judge that.

Bonnie Granat
www.granatedit.com





^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ROBOHELP X5 - ALL NEW VERSION. Now with Word 2003 support, Content
Management, Multi-Author support, PDF and XML support and much more!

Now is the best time to buy - special end of month promos, including:
$100 mail-in rebate; Free online orientation on content management
functionality; Huge savings on support and future product releases;
PLUS Great discounts on RoboHelp training. OFFER EXPIRES April 30th!
Call 1-800-358-9370 or visit: http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -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
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.



References:
The Importance of "The": From: Scott Tiner
Re: The Importance of "The": From: Bonnie Granat
Re: The Importance of "The": From: Mark Baker

Previous by Author: Re: Chest thumping news releases
Next by Author: Re: Linguistic quirks (was: Don't know what to title this...)
Previous by Thread: Re: The Importance of "The"
Next by Thread: Re: The Importance of "The"


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


Sponsored Ads