From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Parkins Subject: Re: [PATCH] Edit user manual for grammar Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 20:27:59 +0100 Message-ID: <200706122028.01310.andyparkins@gmail.com> References: <588192970706120518p201b52fdi9ed48896278b9f3e@mail.gmail.com> <200706121643.19837.andyparkins@gmail.com> <20070612175421.GA26767@fieldses.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ansi_x3.4-1968" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "J. Bruce Fields" To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 12 21:28:17 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HyC2K-0000GN-M7 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 21:28:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752026AbXFLT2H (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:28:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752020AbXFLT2G (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:28:06 -0400 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.233]:25208 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751863AbXFLT2D (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 15:28:03 -0400 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 76so1396121wra for ; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:28:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=hbpN2T8GmD8FQodYtDShfPrzN6bkFdCpHwhXentQs3OQ0exfeteihdZuQIEEjwFc9VBCBV/rddn4vDg9KPlMO29AFWOfq8xHdvysn/M2C0vvSThFawLaobtVe8tNvSNV1T62JjoHqt8f7pey0OmB3xH+upvvib/m0fE58gacwEI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; b=NxsN1/kaUNjTOwD1/j22x0cPXifbkTzRrxmhQXMWv/WNdljL02iO0BN9GqF8XZ6U/ef8BaEoD43FD7dX2dlnk+9V2JI9b9nm9WC0h8SwKU89+eL+KkZnYigakweejgk/qSxAGXjV4icj9wjZnJwyOdUmgnT83/k/P9M8/ZKusT4= Received: by 10.78.138.6 with SMTP id l6mr2877373hud.1181676482470; Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from grissom.local ( [84.201.153.164]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 35sm1523584nfu.2007.06.12.12.28.01 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:28:01 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 In-Reply-To: <20070612175421.GA26767@fieldses.org> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tuesday 2007, June 12, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 04:43:19PM +0100, Andy Parkins wrote: > > - "last-resort" is two words, not a conjoined word, it doesn't > > require the hyphen > > Right, but when you've got a couple words functioning together to > modify a following noun, the hyphen's pretty standard: "rosy-fingered > dawn". Is this case an exception? I suspect it's fine either way.... It's certainly common, I don't think that it's correct though. The hyphen's is to form a new word from multiple other words; but often these days it's just used to join two words that the author wanted saying faster in his head. The test I always use is if the meaning remains the same without the hyphen, it wasn't necessary. Examples: merry-go-round versus merry go round editor-in-chief versus editor in chief Both of the above loose their meaning when they don't have the hyphens. "last-resort" doesn't need to be compound because separated it still means "the resort that is last". I don't say that it is a definitive _wrong_ as the meaning is not lost nor modified; but I've always viewed English like programming - don't add unnecessary complication. > > - "method of" is vulgar, "method for" is nicer > > Reference? Please don't take "vulgar" to mean disgusting, I meant "common". Sorry if that was offensive. Preposition selection and use is highly localised. I will happily accept if you don't agree. Here is the only reference I can find, but it is certainly not definitive, not entirely about this subject... http://mb.sparknotes.com/mb.epl?b=2437&m=1259471&t=355765&w=1 However, it does make the case that "of" is possessive, so a "method of ..." means "a method that belongs to ...", so to my ears "a method for" seems the better choice. > What we really need is a complete recovery tutorial to stick in here > someplace. (One day git complains about a corrupt pack file. What > do you do?) What's been stopping me from doing it, besides time, is > no idea how to come up with a good example to work with. A big magnet on your hard disk? ;-) Andy -- Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET andyparkins@gmail.com