Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 19:15:45 -0400 From: Mike Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org> To: Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> Cc: rionda@gufi.org Subject: Re: UPDATING readability Message-ID: <41744EA1.90808@kutulu.org> In-Reply-To: <20041018090607.C11579@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> References: <1097916792.1810.4.camel@kaiser.sig11.org> <200410161208.32381.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> <20041018090607.C11579@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Harti Brandt wrote: > On Sat, 16 Oct 2004, David Syphers wrote: > > DS>On Saturday 16 October 2004 01:53 am, Matteo Riondato wrote: > DS>> Could we change an entry from: > DS>> > DS>> 20041007: > DS>> One of the syscalls the 1:1 threading library libthr uses has > DS>> changed, thus breaking ABI compatibility. Make sure you rebuild > DS>> this library with the kernel. > DS>> > DS>> to: > DS>> > DS>> 20041007: > DS>> One of the syscalls used by the 1:1 threading library libthr > DS>> has changed, thus breaking ABI compatibility. Make sure you rebuild > DS>> this library with the kernel. > DS>> > DS>> I think this will improve the readability and the comprension of the > DS>> entry by the non-native english speakers. > DS> > DS>I hate to be pedantic, but the original entry is preferable. In English it is > DS>correct to avoid the passive voice when possible (though not nearly to the > DS>extent that, say, French does). The active voice is quite appropriate here, > DS>where the subject is clearly defined. Is there a particular reason why > DS>non-native speakers would prefer the passive voice? > > The verbs are coming very late in the sentence. That's not a problem for > german speakers :-) but from experience I know that speakers from > languages where the verb must come near the beginning of the sentence have > a problem with this. The omission of the 'that' makes that even harder, > because you can't parse the sentence into grammatical units until you see > the 'uses' at the end of the line. That forces you to roll back and > re-parse. Would it be appropriate to flip the order of the sentances around? This would avoiding having two distinct noun-phrases in the first sentance, which is where I think the verb confusion is coming in: 20041007: The 1:1 threading library, libthr, must be rebuilt when building a kernel. One of the syscalls it uses has changed, thus breaking ABI compatibility. -- -- Mike Still using IE? Get Firefox! http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=6492&t=1
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41744EA1.90808>