Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 04:20:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it> To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: docs/30749: Typo in the handbook's section 14.3 Message-ID: <200109231120.f8NBKAs91207@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR docs/30749; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@neomedia.it> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, Shill <shill@free.fr> Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: docs/30749: Typo in the handbook's section 14.3 Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 13:09:58 +0200 (CEST) > Shill said on Sep 22, 2001 at 16:08:33: > > > > In the handbook's section 14.3: > > http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x13973.html > > > > "After adding the driver(s) you need to your kernel configuration file" > > -> delete "you need" (?) > What's wrong with it as it stands? (I'm not sure whether, strictly > speaking, a "which" is required before "you need" but it's common > usage as it is.) AFAIK, you are correct. "the driver(s) you need" contains an identifying (also: defining, restrictive) relative clause; that is, you speak of **certain** drivers (the driver(s) you need). **Object** relative pronouns are often omitted in an informal style. <possible reason for Shill's difficulty> The whole sentence, "[adding [the driver you need] [to you kernel configuration file]]", **might** sound ambiguous, ie might also be interpreted as "[adding the driver [you need to your kernel configuration file]]"; however, considering the syntactic features of the constituents, viz the constructions the verb "(to) need" can be used in, I can see no syntactic or semantic ambiguity. I would say the sentence sounds good. :-) Just my 0.02 Euro -- Salvo To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200109231120.f8NBKAs91207>