[projectaon] Re: More 24rw errata
- From: Jonathan Blake <jonathan.blake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:52:33 -0700
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Simon Osborne <outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 29/07/2010 19:56, Benjamin I Krefetz wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010, Jonathan Blake wrote:
>>
>>> (er) 61, 289, 334: If you survive -> If you complete [SO: Or, this
>>> mission successfully -> this mission]
>>>
>>> This one is testing my resolve to only change wording that is
>>> incorrect or misleading/burdensome to the reader. The idea that you
>>> could be successful in surviving a mission is not incorrect and it
>>> hints that you must not only survive but be successful for future
>>> missions to take place. But I like Simon's suggestion....
>>>
>>> I vote leave as is.
>>
>> Thing is, as currently written, "successfully" modifies "survive", which
>> means it's contrasting with
>> "survive unsuccessfully". I understand how you can be unsuccessful at
>> surviving something, but I
>> don't think you can survive something unsuccessfully.
>
> Seconded. ;-)
Come on guys. Have you forgotten that other Section 61, the one from
The Caverns of Kalte? ;)
http://www.projectaon.org/en/xhtml/lw/03tcok/sect61.htm
Aside from that example of surviving unsuccessfully, I think the text
as it stands carries the meaning that the proposed corrections make. I
see where you're coming from. I think the divide comes when we're
trying too hard to make natural language fit into standard forms.
An example that I personally hate is the construct "try and" as in
"I'll try and meet with you." That makes no sense if you break it down
to its individual words. It would be better to say "I'll try to meet
with you." But you heard and read "try and" absolutely everywhere.
It's a part of natural language that everyone understands and that
hasn't been rationalized.
So with "successfully survive", it seems kind of silly to say it that
way if you think about it, but that kind of construct is ubiquitous
and everyone understands, no?
Having said that, I'm not completely opposed to changing it. :) Any
other thoughts?
--
Jon
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
