use Perl

• apples and oranges (Score:1)

  by educated_foo (3106)

  Is is just me, or are there vast seas of difference between its/it's confusion and arbitrary latin-derived strictures about future tense and passive voice? The former is just a spelling error, and one way (whichever one its;) is misspelled. The latter are violations of rules that help with formal writing, but are rarely heard of otherwise, and are routinely violated in speech. The guy on the street has no idea what you're talking about (or no idea of what about which you are talking?) -- although he prob
  • Re:apples and oranges (Score:2)

    by gnat (29)

    Almost every "rule" is violated in spoken language (and anyway, who can hear the difference between "its" and "it's"? :-).

    That's okay for most people (less okay for professional orators such as politicians, not that I'm thinking of a particular jackass with his finger on the nukular button). In case it wasn't clear, I was talking about writing that I have to edit for publication.

    When you're writing, you have only the words to communicate with. And printed words are a very clumsy way to communicate (th
    • Re:apples and oranges (Score:1)

      by educated_foo (3106)

      I guess I don't understand mistaking its for it's, because once you unpack it, the mistake's right there -- "X rain" is either "it is rain" (it's) or "the rain belonging to it" (its). So while it may be easy to misspell, there's a straightforward way to bring language intuitions to bear on the problem. Plus, I thought it was "good style" to avoid contractions in formal writing. Maybe this is why...

      On the other hand, if asked whether I should say "the book which I like" or "the book that I like", it's d
      • Re:apples and oranges (Score:2)

        by Theory (10) on 2002.09.26 13:01 (#13349) Homepage Journal

        if you know of one, please let us know!

        Here's the rule I always use: I recite to myself, "Dogs which bite" and "Dogs that bite". Nat's right about the comma, as in the first example I'd rather have "Dogs, which bite." That's the way it flows for me (punctuation-foo).

        Anyway, when I recite these two phrases, I hear their meaning. The first implies that "all dogs bite," and I'm talking about all dogs, while the latter implies that "some doges bite," and I'm just talking about those particular dogs. Then it's easy for me to use the right one, as I already know whether I'm talking about just those things that x, or about all things and all things x.

        --David

        Reply to This

        Parent