Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 5 Jan 2010 16:24:47 -0800
From:      Stanislav Sedov <stas@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r201477 - head/games/fortune/datfiles
Message-ID:  <20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B43D346.4020900@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201001040916.o049GZ1Y013061@svn.freebsd.org> <4B4384E3.2080600@FreeBSD.org> <20100105152300.eb7a66d1.stas@FreeBSD.org> <4B43D346.4020900@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 16:03:18 -0800
Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> mentioned:

> Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> > Thanks for suggestions!
>=20
> And thank you for making the changes. :)
>=20
> > What's regarding the "there're" spelling --- I'm not sure what the
> > correct version is: I took this quote from the San Francisco
> > Chronicle newspaper, and it saved the original spelling.
>=20
> Couple of things regarding that. First, "there're" is very far from
> being a common English construction, especially in formal speech such
> as the context of this quote. Second, I found numerous citations that
> have it spelled out on line, I didn't find any that had the
> contraction (although I admit that I did not do an exhaustive search).
> Finally, the chronicle is not who I would choose to be objective in
> regards to a quotation from someone with whom they share an opposite
> political viewpoint. :)

Yeah, true :-)

>=20
> In regards to what you appended to the date, "On" would be fine, after
> thinking about it "Regarding" would probably be more clear. Either way
> it should be capitalized. The "to" should definitely be changed to
> "of" however, for proper English'ification.

Hmm, I'm not by any means the English language expert [just learning],
but isn't "invasion of" in this context is somewhat vague?  I mean,
from what I see from dictionaries "invasion of smth" could mean both
the action by smth, and action against smth.  Is "invasion to"
grammatically incorrect?

BTW, why it should be capitalized, it's not a start of a sentence?

>=20
> I'm happy to make the changes if you'd rather, since I realize that
> it's annoying having to fix grammar nits, especially about something
> as trivial as the fortune files. :)
>=20

Yeah, please do.  I'm clearly not competent enough at this area.

--=20
Stanislav Sedov
ST4096-RIPE

--Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=+Jem
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Signature=_Tue__5_Jan_2010_16_24_47_-0800_.By98Nb8oPcr5+BP--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100105162447.7deac6d7.stas>