Slashdot Mirror

Many people have already mentioned it, but it bears repeating. You absolutely cannot go wrong with Strunk (and White's) Elements of Style. It's short, easy to read, and informative. Following the advice in Strunk's book will be a great help for anyone wishing to improve his prose.

See The Elements of Style by W. Strunk and E.B. White for excellent guidance on this and many other topics.

• The active voice is (supposedly) more "forceful." (WTF is that supposed to mean?)
• Therefore, you should not use the passive. Except in all the cases where you should use the passive, in which case, you should use the passive.

To be more charitable towards Strunk and White, they kind of incipiently shoot at the rule that subjects are usually topical, in the little bit where they talk about the passive being OK if the topic of the paragraph is the passive subject. The problems are that: (a) they issue an unhelpful, near-blanket prohibition against a construction, and an even more unhelpful side comment that it's somehow sometimes OK; (b) native English speakers already know at some level that subject should be topical, and already use passives in their spontaneous speech to make sure that the topical argument is the subject of the sentence.

I spent the last year working hard on improving my writing skills, and I can attest that translating a writing guide into a set of rational design rules is a crucial first step when teaching writing to scientists or engineers. Most humanities people have a very different view of what it means to "analyze" or even "understand" something, and accordingly most writing guides heavily rely on examples, rather than on logical explanations. I find that older books, like the venerable "Elements of Style" already mentioned here, are easier for me to understand and learn from, because they tend to be more prescriptive, and thus focus on the rules and, most importantly, rationalize the rules rather than simply state them. If I understand why a certain style element works best, I can much easier spot and correct the incorrect usage.

Bartleby offers a free electronic (HTML) version of "Elements of Style".

On the same site, they offer a few more classic texts and reference books on English Usage, Style & Composition. I find their collection of electronic references very useful, because it includes a "search" function, which by default searches through the entire collection. Very handy for looking up grammar rules or proper word usage.

Bartleby offers a free electronic (HTML) version of "Elements of Style".

On the same site, they offer a few more classic texts and reference books on English Usage, Style & Composition. I find their collection of electronic references very useful, because it includes a "search" function, which by default searches through the entire collection. Very handy for looking up grammar rules or proper word usage.

Actually, you add 's to singular nouns, even if they end in s. See, for example,

http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html#1

The rule for adding an apostrophe after the s applies for plural possessives. In this case, "Jobs" happens to be singular, so Jobs's is the correct form; "Jobs' " would be correct for, say, Fred Job and Sally Job taken together.

Merriam Websters:
censorship Noun 1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring
censor Transitive Verb to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable

American Heritage:
censorship Noun: 1. The act, process, or practice of censoring.
censor Transitive Verb: To examine and expurgate.

Oxford English Dictionary: [subscription required]
censorship n. 2. a. The office or function of a censor; official supervision.
censor n. 2. a. One who exercises official or officious supervision over morals and conduct.
censor v. trans. To act as censor to

Merriam Websters:
censorship Noun 1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring
censor Transitive Verb to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable

American Heritage:
censorship Noun: 1. The act, process, or practice of censoring.
censor Transitive Verb: To examine and expurgate.

Oxford English Dictionary: [subscription required]
censorship n. 2. a. The office or function of a censor; official supervision.
censor n. 2. a. One who exercises official or officious supervision over morals and conduct.
censor v. trans. To act as censor to

Don't forget that there are not just libraries of book metadata online, there are libraries of complete books:

• Project Gutenberg
• Newton's Library
• Bartleby II
• Electronic Text Center at UVA Library
• Tech Books for Free
• etc.

While these libraries are by no means as extensive as something like Amazon, it's nice having the full text of the books themselves.

It's
just
you.

How about this: Wiki or Columbia Encyclopedia.

If you take Wiki at face value, Olds 'invented' the assembly line. If you read the second paragraph of the second article carefully you'll see it says Ford *adapted* conveyor belts and the assembly line for automotive production.

Dear Dantoo,

I think this link may interest you:

http://www.bartleby.com/61/43/P0144300.html

I learn something every day

De gustibus non est disputandum.

Unfortunately, George Bernad Shaw disagrees with you, and he set the standard for the english translation of Nietzsche's term in his play Man and Superman

THE STATUE: And who the deuce is the Superman?

THE DEVIL: Oh, the latest fashion among the Life Force fanatics. Did
you not meet in Heaven, among the new arrivals, that German Polish
madman? what was his name? Nietzsche?

Act III. Shaw, Bernard. 1903. Man and Superman

http://www.learnenglish.de/grammar/casepossgen.htm
http://www.bartleby.com/64/82.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe_%28mark%29

The Vex System is no more a robot than a remote controlled model airplane or my car is.

A remote controlled device is NOT a robot.

A robot is a mechanical and electronic device that performs a function(s) under its own control. It is capable of making its own decisions.

An android (NOT "droid") is a robot with the appearance of a human or animal.

For further enlightment read "I, Robot" by Isaac Asimov.

And finally, the whole thing sounds like it fits very well into both the American Heritage and Wikipedia definitions, which (by the way) do appear to allow remote control devices.

Actually its from the Bible

Furthermore, a cheapskate like myself never pays more than $0.50 for a book, usually $0.25 for paparbacks, since books are one of the more common items found at yard sales and thrift shops. And then there's sharing with friends...books are actually one of the cheapest forms of entertainment.

Further furthermore, lots of classics are now on-line at places such as http://www.bartleby.com/ and http://www.bootlegbooks.com/ These books are HTML formatted and easy to read in a browser. Maybe not as convenient as a book or ebook reader, but as cheap as possible.

What you need to do, Rebeka, is read John Stuart Mills' "On Liberty" (specifically Chapter IV). Then perhaps you will realise just how short sighted your thinking is. An inept bureacracy is just as bad if not worse than an actual conspiracy.

Too bad your online tutoring company couldn't take the "teaching moment" opportunity to teach kids the truth about "authoritative sources". Especially since USA Today is edited on the same principles as Bartleby, not Wikipedia. Not to mention that "Bartlby.com" is a typo hijack site for Bartleby.com, which I'm guessing is the website you meant to type.

That's a much more valuable lesson in learning than even the total contents of Bartlby plus Wikipedia. But then, you'd be teaching kids to question your authority as well, cross-referencing you rather than just accepting whatever you say. You might start by pointing your kids to the socratic method.

Are we sure those are coffee cups and not Grecian urns?
Maybe we can get John Keats to write "Ode to a Coffee Cup"!

most nouns ending in o

Sorry, no dictionaries indexed in the selected category contain the word typoes.

Show me a dictionary or other authoritative source that lists "typoes" as the correct plural form of "typo".

Thanks.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/91/T0449100.html
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
typo
SYLLABICATION: typo
PRONUNCIATION: tp
NOUN: Inflected forms: pl. typos
Informal A typographical error.

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
typo
One entry found for typo.
Main Entry: typo
Pronunciation: 'tI-(")pO
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural typos

When did "hire" become a noun? See this link for American English, Hire is a noun, probably for at least 10 years, if not since at least WWII

At least as far as several of the greatest writers in the last 2 centuries are concerned, I did get it right. For your reference (because I can't warp you back to the discussions I have had on this rule):

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/059.html

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/cyc/s/split.h tm

http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/magazine/writing /grammartrap.html ( see "Examples of Fake Rules" down towards the bottom)

So as long at it sounds good to my ear, I will continue to split infinitives. Of course, a once over of your own post is in order.

Have you read Edmund Burke's Reflections on the French Revolution? England lasted as a Republic for only eleven years between 1649 and 1660. King Charles II took care of that little rabble rousing "social experiment." All hail the King!!!

Frankly, I speak English, and this half-arsed corporatisation of American colloquia needs to stop. It's not attractive, and it makes British ears very unhappy.

Not for nothing, but this verbization* of words by damn British colloquia hurts my sensitive American ears.

Nice that you call Brown a "terrorist," when as far as I know he never attacked innocent civilians. Are you suggesting that a man who dies for a cause is automatically a failure? I suggest you read the Wikipedia article on Brown -- you might have to re-think your opinion of the man.

As for Lincoln, he is indeed well-respected, but that says little of the man's personal integrity or worth. Many of Lincoln's actions could be considered tyrannical, and his Emancipation Proclamation was likely made for political reasons rather than because of personal convictions:

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. -Lincoln-Douglas debates at Charleston

Funny how that quote never gets mentioned, isn't it?

A Reflexion Upon Contemporary Conservatism's Moral Relativism:
No Real Conservative would ever ground justifcations for their deeds in the acts, words, or thoughts of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Yet this is precisely what they do when rationalising the theft of habeas corpus and due process rights from the "detainees" of the Bush Farce Upon Terror. This sans-a-spine tyranny, the reprehensible thievery of natural liberty, is an act more befitting trotskyites than conservatives.

I am astounded by your reference to a pope's preascendent pontification vituperating moral relativism, whose own youthful history could be construed as an exemplary case study of situationalism past. Do you have a url for this readily at hand? Don't provide it if your conception of the creative is connected to him though. It amuses, may be used in future heterodoxical musing, and I am a proficient searchengine tech user. Does the XVI signify fifteen prior Pope Benedicts?

I am not decidedly antipapist though; I question Luther and Calvin too.

From the Dreamtime:

"...shake off all the fears and servile prejudices, under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."

Thomas Jefferson;
letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787
The Writings of Thomas Jefferson
Memorial Edition (Lipscomb and Bergh, editors)
20 Vols., Washington, D.C., 1903-04.
Volume 6; pp 256-262

Over to the dilemma of the atheist:

"God is the solitude of men. There was only me:
I alone decided to commit Evil; alone,
I invented Good.
I am the one who cheated,
I am the one who performed miracles,
I am the one accusing myself today,
I alone can absolve myself;
me, the man."

--Jean-Paul Sartre
--The Devil and the Good Lord, act 10, scene 4

Also, is your given email pointer just a spam vacuum?

I may love my country, but that doesn't mean I think they're always right.

Interesting how you managed to pound out a long winded dissertation on the definition of "science" when you apparently don't even know the definition yourself. This definition is neither strict nor explicitly connected to the Newtonian Scientific Method.

Science, by definition, is a broadly defined as "activities applied to an object of inquiry or study", and your examples of "Invention, research and other progress of human knowledge" clearly fit this definition.

Language is the tool we use to communicate, and if different sides in a debate keep redefining the meaning of the words used to decribe the core concepts being debated, then the language becomes meaningless, and thus, the debate itself will become meaningless, and both sides will be reduced to packs of monkeys trying to out-OOK each other.

Indeed. You should probably work on that.

Methinks you're just being pointlessly anal retentive for mod points' sake.

Anal-retentive is properly spelled with a hyphen.

Nobody laughs when I tell them that (I do get an occasional groan), but it never gets old to me!

Jesse Helms? Strom Thurmond? The Southern Manifesto? Yeah, real upstanding bunch.

All the people who reelected Reagan in 1984 would probably disagree with you. "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

Are you better off than you were 25 years ago? To the tune of $8.2 Trillion better off? No, not in the slightest. I've got a quote you might recognize... "To continue this long trend [deficit spending] is to guarantee tremendous social, cultural, political, and economic upheavals... government is not the solution to our problem; Government is the problem." -- Ronald Reagan, 1981

Oh, you don't remember that? Let me refresh your memory with the #1 and #2 google search results.... Oops!! I guess hearing that Ronald Reagan uttered the words "Government is the problem" just isn't politically correct any more. You'll have to check the other results for ronald reagan 1981 inaugural address because #1 & #2 have simply edited that little bit out. Hmmm, I wonder how long it will be before results 1-30 don't mention the actual words spoken. But hey, now we're way off topic.

Mind you, I'm not arguing for the Democrats. I'm simply pointing to evidence of the truth contained in the article we're supposed to be discussing. Did you even think before you typed out your post? It sounds like you retrieved duckspeak directly from memory to me.

In any case,

On one wall is the text of his second inaugural, there was something there that this brought to mind-

It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged.

full text here

The more modern use it that of a small interesting fact:

Factoid has since developed a second meaning, that of a brief, somewhat interesting fact, that might better have been called a factette.

I have not seen a use in recent memory of facts that were not true - though indeed very trivial facts. Modern use tends more towards the "it's true, but really doens't matter much to most people".

"Irregardless" is a horrible word to use in any discussion whre you want to be taken seriously. This is probably one of the most common "bad words that intelligent people throw into a conversation, and few people questions it's misuse" that you will find.

References: World Wide Words

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

American Heritage Dictionary

Get It Write

And don't feel like I am calling you an idiot. My father spent YEARS giving me crap about this. lol

This is definitely off-topic, interesting nonetheless.

Take a look here: http://www.bartleby.com/61/70/J0087000.html

Ignorance? "Team of Rivals" I've read -- and Professor DiLorenzo does a great job here and here. Goodwin is definitely the "court historian" and he puts it -- continuing with the lies and the myth that to this day call Lincoln a great man instead of a worthless tyrant that he truly was.

Lincoln HAD no philosophy. He repeatedly changed his opinions on a whim in order to produce a false philosophy for whoever he was speaking to at the moment. Laurence Vance comes up with some great advice for Lincoln lovers:

In his debate with Stephen Douglas:

I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. Yes, friends, that is Honest Abe talking.

In Lincoln's First Inaugural Address:

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

In Lincoln's Letter to Horance Greenley, the editor of the New York Tribune:

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.

Oh, and Lincoln didn't free slaves in the United States -- the Confederate States of America legally and constitutionally seceeded (per the 9th and 10th Amendment as well as many State constitutions that held that right before signing into the Union), so they were out of Lincoln's control. Lincoln decided to basically free slaves in another country! Here is where Lincoln did NOT free slaves that existed in the Union:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

Look at those states and cities that Lincoln refused to release from slavery!

Lincoln's Army raped and pillaged the south -- setting fires everywhere. He destroyed Indians who were neutral on the War between States. Lincoln HATED blacks, and he only fought the war to preserve the Union so he could tax the prosperous South to pay tribute to his friends in the north with corporate welfare dollars.

Don't believe what you learned in school -- history written by the winners, not written based on the facts.

Ignorance? "Team of Rivals" I've read -- and Professor DiLorenzo does a great job here and here. Goodwin is definitely the "court historian" and he puts it -- continuing with the lies and the myth that to this day call Lincoln a great man instead of a worthless tyrant that he truly was.

Lincoln HAD no philosophy. He repeatedly changed his opinions on a whim in order to produce a false philosophy for whoever he was speaking to at the moment. Laurence Vance comes up with some great advice for Lincoln lovers:

In his debate with Stephen Douglas:

I will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. Yes, friends, that is Honest Abe talking.

In Lincoln's First Inaugural Address:

I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.

In Lincoln's Letter to Horance Greenley, the editor of the New York Tribune:

My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.

Oh, and Lincoln didn't free slaves in the United States -- the Confederate States of America legally and constitutionally seceeded (per the 9th and 10th Amendment as well as many State constitutions that held that right before signing into the Union), so they were out of Lincoln's control. Lincoln decided to basically free slaves in another country! Here is where Lincoln did NOT free slaves that existed in the Union:

Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans) Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)], and which excepted parts, are for the present, left precisely as if this proclamation were not issued.

Look at those states and cities that Lincoln refused to release from slavery!

Lincoln's Army raped and pillaged the south -- setting fires everywhere. He destroyed Indians who were neutral on the War between States. Lincoln HATED blacks, and he only fought the war to preserve the Union so he could tax the prosperous South to pay tribute to his friends in the north with corporate welfare dollars.

Don't believe what you learned in school -- history written by the winners, not written based on the facts.

It seems that the plural of colossus is, indeed, colossi.

I go to bed less stupid each day.

alien and sedition acts

(Rather like the PATRIOT Act)

Repealed or expired over 2 centuries ago, according to
http://www.bartleby.com/65/al/AlienNSe.html

Things have changed since then. In recent decades the US has been pressuring other countries to give foreigners (esp. US investors) equal rights. So they have ratified reciprocal treaties.

Death. http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE339.html

Try knowledge instead: http://www.bartleby.com/61/80/X0008000.html

(bch) (KEY) , 1769-98, American journalist, b. Philadelphia; son of Richard Bache and grandson of Benjamin Franklin. In 1790 he founded the Philadelphia General Advertiser (later the Aurora). As the champion of the Jeffersonians, Bache's paper denounced the Federalists bitterly, and he was arrested under the Sedition Act (see Alien and Sedition Acts) but was released on parole. He died soon afterward of yellow fever.

Before spending any money on an SEO book, people should make use of the free online resources, for instance Highrankings Forums.

SEM is hard work. But if you want to do it yourself:

1. Create useful content targeted at humans. Write clear, clean prose. Read Strunk and White's The Elements of Style online for free
2. Provide something unique and valuable on the site so people will link to it.
3. Advertise with Pay-Per-Click, even if it's just $50 per month. That will help you understand what keywords work best for your site, and which advertising messages resonate with the public
4. Validate your code. Program for accessibility using CSS layout. Standards-compliant HTML will load correctly and display useful information on browsers for Linux, Windows, Max OS, Blackberry, and other platforms. If your code is riddled with errors, or inaccessible links (Javascript, Flash), Googlebot won't be able to index your site or read all your content.

Do the above and you will be better than 99% of all web sites.

...Shylock, the Jewish lawyer from Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice.

Shylock was a money lender, not a lawyer. A shylock usually means a userer, someone who lends money at an excessive rate interest rate.

Thanks for pointing out the existing synonyms.

Oh that was real helpful. ;-D

Pretty much synonymous:

extant and existent.

Pretty much synonymous:

extant and existent.

The issue is of Shylock and antisemitism is dicussed at more length than I am willing to read right now at this site. A more concise summary of Shylock is over yonder.