Student Numbers

[Simon]

No: HPFGUIDX 13080

Steve: "To me it reads like a simple statement of fact, albeit imprecise.
But what is the problem with imprecision in this context? The reader does
not need to know whether there are a 100, 102 or 97 tables. So "about 100"
is quite adequete here."
Penny: "Well, of course it would be silly to say that there were 97 tables.
But, why not say there *were* 100 tables (I'm sure JKR didn't have it
worked out that there needed to be 97 tables with 11 seats each to seat
every guest she imagined at the Ball).  Why include the "about"?  If it
*is* the narrator stating that fact, why qualify the reference?  The
narrator *knows* how many tables there are, right?  I just don't think the
"about" qualifier makes it irrefutable that there were in fact 100 tables."


Another point to add here would be that I would consider the statement
'there were 100 tables' to mean that the number of tables was around 100,
not necessarily exactly 100. Scanning a room quickly it would not be at all
easy to tell the difference between 97 and 103 tables unless they were laid
out in an obvious row format. Something that I doubt they would be for the
ball.

Hence the word about is not even needed in the sentence, as its inclusion
seems to serve no purpose.

Of course this is probably the mathematician in me speaking.


Simon
--
Come and talk about anything with other Harry Potter fans:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter
----------------------------------------------------------------------