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.
Subject:Re: Data are vs Data is From:Michael Lewis <lewism -at- BRANDLE -dot- COM -dot- AU> Date:Fri, 16 Jan 1998 12:06:22 +1100
Mary Nurminen wrote:
> Michael Lewis wrote:
> >
> > I sympathise with your reluctance, but the simple fact is that the
> > language belongs to the general public, not to us "experts" (or should
> > that be "we experts", as in "we [who are] experts"?)
>
> No, it should be 'us experts' because it is the object of the preposition 'to'.
That's the obvious interpretation, but I think it's wrong: the object of
the preposition "to" isn't just the word "us": it's the phrase "us/we
experts". For my money, that phrase is a contraction of "we who are
experts" -- not "us who are experts". However, I've only got my own
analysis to go on: I've not found a formal treatment anywhere.
[Apology to Eric and all others who don't get excited about this kind of
debate: I know it's off topic, but ...]
--
Michael Lewis
Brandle Pty Limited, Sydney, Australia
PO Box 1249, Strawberry Hills, NSW 2012
Tel +61-2-9310-2224 ... Fax +61-2-9310-5056
