[HPFGU-OTChatter] Re: Run-on sentences

[P. Alexis Nguyen]

Carol responds:
> Oh, don't trust Word!
> I do use it as the last stage of editing, mainly to make sure that I haven't
> accidentally deleted a word or run two words together in change tracking,
> but sometimes I just roll my eyes and wonder when we'll get an editing
> program actually designed by or in collaboration with an editor!

Ali:
I do the same.  The other folks at work ignore the Word spell/grammar
check altogether (we have a bit of technical language that Word always
flags as wrong, and boy, our clients apparently all spell their names
improperly as according to Word), but I use it as the last, last
stage, useful for catching the random mistakes where I've accidentally
deleted a space or something.  As with anything else, it's a tool, the
usefulness of which is up to you to determine.

As for Word's grammar check being terrible, I cut it a break just
because it can't think, and there's quite a bit of thinking involved
in editing the English language.  Still, I do wish those yourself,
himself, herself, etc. wouldn't get flagged all the time.


Carol:
> Oho! then you're the perfect person to try your hand at the subpoena
> sentence in my previous post!

Ali:
Ah but I'm not.  Quite a few of my professors spent some part of our
time together dissecting why certain legal sentences are written the
way they are.  Now, that's not saying that "legalese" doesn't exist,
just that there is some reasoning behind what's said (not all of it,
of course - even I, who loves the passive sentences in informal
writing, go nuts reading legalese).  I'm going to give it a shot (see
below) but I don't actually think I'll be doing much reducing,
especially since I think it makes perfect sense written the way it is,
which thereby reduces my ability to rewrite in a way that supposedly
makes more sense - I think this is the reason why legalese exists: it
makes sense to those writing and those for whom the item was written
and thereby few make effort to "make sense" of something that already
makes sense to most parties involved.  And I apologize for that
sentence ...

Original:
Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the
taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers,
directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify
on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the
matters on which the person will testify.

Rewrite:
If one is subpoenaed for the purpose of taking a deposition but is not
part of this suit, one can designate a party (or parties) to testify
on one's behalf and may direct the matter that said party will testify
on.

My sentence is shorter, to be sure, but it is also less precise.  The
prior sentence mentions "officers, directors, managing agents."  I
admittedly don't know much about the nature of depositions (my law
courses were all in business law, mostly pertaining to pharma and
healthcare, and case law, not much about the actual practice thereof)
but a mention of a list like that is usually meant to direct the
reader to the nature of the relationship between the person subpoenaed
and the party representing him/her.


Carol:
> That's great for, say, fourth graders. But older kids in middle school and
> high school should learn subordination. (I'm with you on active voice,
> though!)

Ali:
I guess that depends on what's useful.  I'll just settle for teaching
kids to write.  I happen to think most adults (especially business
professionals - dear lord, especially business professionals) can do
just fine with the Hemingway-esque writing, and I say this because
what's taught in 4th grade is clearly not reinforced well-enough to
last into adulthood with many adults I've met.  Despite being a
younger and having to listen to adults about how kids aren't taught
proper grammar and whatnot anymore, I am extremely appalled by the
writing skills of my superiors, of my old clients who can direct a lab
to make chemicals I can't fathom but can't put a pen to paper for the
life of them, of my last few bosses who capitalized words with wild
abandon and can't figure out where commas properly go.  I'll take
Hemingway over nothing.

Personally, I think everyone should have to go through class with my
12th grade English teacher.  She may have hated all passive sentences
(okay, so it was an essay and I can understand her dislike there, but
damn it, I love passive sentences in informal writing), overly long
sentences, and all things that can give personality to an essay, but
the woman got every last one of us to learn how to quickly and
efficiently organize our thoughts into one cohesive essay.  I am not
too proud to brag that I kicked butt on my AP and IB English exams,
and it was all thanks to her (though I am thankful that she hadn't
drilled my love of passive sentences out of me).


Carol:
> I can't stand Faulkner. I think it's because he spends so much time
> describing the scenery that you never get to know his characters as people.
> Hemingway doesn't describe much of anything. (Nick poured coffee for the fat
> man and the skinny man. The fat man took a sip. "Do you like the coffee?"
> Nick asked. "No," the fat man said. "Get us some bacon," the skinny man
> said. "Do you have any bacon?") Okay, I made that up, but that's how I think
> of Hemingway.

Ali:
Blegh.  I can't stand Faulkner or Hemingway or any of those highly
celebrated authors - I went through a "dead white guys" phase where I
read Faulkner, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, etc. and found out that maybe I
just hate American Lit (to be fair to American Lit, I also gave
authors like Willa Cather a try before I came to this conclusion).  I
merely admire Faulkner's talent with a sentence because I am
fascinated when someone has such mastery over the English language
that he can write such ridiculous sentences.  I cannot, however, be
bothered to read Faulkner (Sound and the Fury was exceptionally not
enjoyable).

And you know, I probably would not have figure out that was not a
Hemingway passage if you didn't tell me.  You used the name Nick, for
one.  And then there's also the fact that, as you said, the man's
writing has zero personality.  (I still count my time reading For Whom
the Bell Tolls as one of the least useful of my life and am angry that
I'll never get those hours back.)

~Ali, who's off to DC and is hoping everyone who's near a cherry
blossom tree takes the time this weekend to celebrate the cherry
blossom festival and the coming of spring