Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 04:36:06 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> To: do not reply to this address <dev.null@funbox.demon.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSDCon East Message-ID: <20000413043606.A10948@theory7.physics.iisc.ernet.in> In-Reply-To: <38F442DB.2FB8@funbox.demon.co.uk>; from dev.null@funbox.demon.co.uk on Wed, Apr 12, 2000 at 10:33:15AM %2B0100 References: <38F442DB.2FB8@funbox.demon.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > In general, split infinitives are easier to understand, if > > only because the adverb is directly adjacent to the verb it modifies, > > and it is in the ordinary English position for modifiers: before. "To > > boldly go" is clearer and even scans better than "Boldly to go" or "To > > go boldly". Fowler would agree. > > *Does* Fowler agree? Me, I doubt it! Fowler gives the following example of a desirable split infinitive: "Our object is to further cement trade relations". Any rearrangement would give a wrong or ambiguous meaning. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000413043606.A10948>