TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: describing the minority as literate is a circular argument?
Subject:Re: describing the minority as literate is a circular argument? From:"Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Tue, 17 Aug 2004 10:00:02 -0700
Well, I'm afraid I have to point out that you just made it. I didn't
say that (I said the rules give us something to rebel against;
the only occasions I have ever used the word "ephemera" all
involved antique shows).
The original quote was this closing passage from a much
longer post, and it was your "comforting thought."
Gene
Was there a point here? Well, anybody who defends the
rules that preserve utility and distinctions of meaning
**because they know both the rules and the reasons behind
them** tends to be in the minority. You can assert, all
you like, that the usage by the unwashed majority is
what dictates "right and proper" usage, and that the
defenders of rules and structure are prissy old fudds.
However, the rules have survived a long time for the
good reason that they have ongoing utility. Change
happens, but not every change and fad-of-common-usage
has staying power. The rules give you something to go
back to, and they provide a necessary inertia against
the vagaries and ephemera of popular usage.
Harrumph! Egad. (*)
Kevin
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mailing List" <mlist -at- safenet-inc -dot- com>
> Note that that was Gene's comforting thought, not mine.
> It's not grammar, but it's a rule that the nesting of
> "> > >" symbols tells you something about who-wrote-what
> in an ongoing thread. In this case, you broke that rule
> and effectively misattributed a statement. I'm as prone
> as anybody to that goof
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.732 / Virus Database: 486 - Release Date: 7/29/2004
ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!
TRY IT TODAY at http://www.macromedia.com/go/techwrl
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed! http://www.webworks.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.