From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Apr 11 22:12: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mail.ptd.net (mail1.ha-net.ptd.net [207.44.96.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C1AA837B848 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2000 22:12:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tms2@mail.ptd.net) Received: (qmail 27577 invoked from network); 12 Apr 2000 05:11:51 -0000 Received: from du12.cli.ptd.net (HELO mail.ptd.net) (204.186.33.12) by mail.ptd.net with SMTP; 12 Apr 2000 05:11:51 -0000 Message-ID: <38F4056E.C745DC8A@mail.ptd.net> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 01:11:10 -0400 From: "Thomas M. Sommers" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSDCon East References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Jay Nelson wrote: > > I would disagree that the notion is antiquated. Split infinitives > create an ambiguous reference that isn't easily understood without > back-tracking and sorting out the pointers. I disagree. In general, split infinitives are easier to understand, if only because the adverb is directly adjacent to the verb it modifies, and it is in the ordinary English position for modifiers: before. "To boldly go" is clearer and even scans better than "Boldly to go" or "To go boldly". Fowler would agree. > Double negatives are equally as bad. "I don't have no X..." is > common American street idiom, but says little except the speaker has > some X -- which isn't what they generally mean. Grammar is not math. In fact, double and triple negatives reinforce each other, not cancel each other. > 'if [ ! "$grammer" != "$common_sense" ]; then...' is difficult to > read, hear or comprehend. The problem arises in defining just what is common sensical, and what isn't. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message