Author Topic: Quotes from work (Read 180798 times)

pooka · « **Reply #1300 on:** December 17, 2013, 11:10:43 AM »

Yup. Might as well roll out the txt translation of the Bible.

dkw · « **Reply #1301 on:** December 17, 2013, 11:25:23 AM »

You couldn't talk them into maybe leaving it as the original but sticking in a footnote with the definition?

Jonathon · « **Reply #1302 on:** December 17, 2013, 11:28:10 AM »

We don't really do footnotes like that (though it's not a bad idea). Plus, this is a proofread on a really tight deadline, so I don't really have the time or the freedom to suggest changes like that at this point.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1303 on:** December 17, 2013, 11:55:58 AM »

In other news, some people take our style rule of capitalizing names and titles of deity entirely too far.

Quote

. . . the law of witnesses was satisfied by the two Beings whose testimonies were irrefutable—the Father and the Son.

Quote

Jesus Christ is the only One to ever live on this earth who could accurately say . . .

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1304 on:** December 17, 2013, 12:21:28 PM »

*snicker*

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #1305 on:** December 17, 2013, 02:32:09 PM »

To be fair, I don't think that many high school students would be familiar with the meaning of proscribe, especially if they saw it paired with prescribe like that. I would think the substitution is fine for the sake of communicating to the intended audience.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1306 on:** December 17, 2013, 02:42:53 PM »

It's a fair point, but then, will they know what "prescribe" means in that context? What about other unfamiliar words? Why even use a quote that students might not understand?

I think what bugs me most is that bracketed changes are usually made to make the grammar of the quote fit the grammar of the surrounding sentence (changing first-person pronouns to third-person pronouns, making verb tense consistent, and so on) or to supply missing referents to pronouns. I don't think I've seen brackets used simply to replace words that might be too hard. It seems to be outside the conventions of permissible changes to a quotation.

dkw · « **Reply #1307 on:** December 17, 2013, 03:33:21 PM »

Yeah. If you're going to change words then paraphrase (with attribution of the idea) instead of quoting.

rivka · « **Reply #1308 on:** December 17, 2013, 03:35:38 PM »

I agree.

Annie Subjunctive · « **Reply #1309 on:** December 17, 2013, 08:57:02 PM »

Quote from: dkw on December 17, 2013, 03:33:21 PM

Yeah. If you're going to change words then paraphrase (with attribution of the idea) instead of quoting.

This would make a lot more sense.

pooka · « **Reply #1310 on:** December 22, 2013, 08:09:46 PM »

I knew that word in high school, but it was from Latin class.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1311 on:** December 30, 2013, 11:53:22 AM »

From instructions on setting up before a meeting:

Quote

Set up chairs around the table (example on right)

Then it has a diagram of chairs around a table, in case you've never used a table and chairs before.

rivka · « **Reply #1312 on:** December 30, 2013, 11:55:29 AM »

Of all the things to include a diagram for . . .

Jonathon · « **Reply #1313 on:** December 30, 2013, 02:11:33 PM »

Seriously. I wonder who looked at the text and thought, "What about people who don't know how to set up chairs around a table or, for that matter, read? We'd better include a diagram for them."

rivka · « **Reply #1314 on:** December 30, 2013, 02:54:13 PM »

Pfft.

No, what probably happened is someone decided it needed more images, and then went looking for which ones could be done easily or stolen from somewhere else.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #1315 on:** December 30, 2013, 09:04:17 PM »

I've seen examples of chairs poorly arranged around a table. DaVinci's Last Supper, for instance.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1316 on:** January 02, 2014, 01:14:41 PM »

I'm editing a job search skills workbook, and it gives some tips on how to answer common interview questions. For "What is your biggest weakness?" it says, "This can be a hard question. Don't share a real weakness (for example, 'I am a compulsive liar')." But wouldn't a compulsive liar feel compelled to lie about being a compulsive liar?

rivka · « **Reply #1317 on:** January 02, 2014, 01:46:22 PM »

I don't think even compulsive liars lie about everything . . .

Jonathon · « **Reply #1318 on:** January 02, 2014, 01:56:09 PM »

But surely the smart ones wouldn't tell the truth about being compulsive liars.

rivka · « **Reply #1319 on:** January 02, 2014, 02:14:57 PM »

One would think.

Tante Shvester · « **Reply #1320 on:** January 02, 2014, 09:05:59 PM »

My answer to that interview question is that I tend to overpack for trips.

Jonathon · « **Reply #1321 on:** January 03, 2014, 12:31:04 PM »

Quote

Sometimes there was a little pride, then pride increased, and finally the people were waxed in pride.

I wonder if a lot of Church members don't realize that wax is a synonym with increase or grow. It's funny that we insist on reading and using King James-esque English so much, but we don't really teach people how to.

rivka · « **Reply #1322 on:** January 03, 2014, 12:38:28 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on January 03, 2014, 12:31:04 PM

Quote
and finally the people were waxed in pride.

Sounds messy.

BlackBlade · « **Reply #1323 on:** January 03, 2014, 02:27:29 PM »

Quote from: Jonathon on January 03, 2014, 12:31:04 PM

Quote
Sometimes there was a little pride, then pride increased, and finally the people were waxed in pride.
I wonder if a lot of Church members don't realize that wax is a synonym with increase or grow. It's funny that we insist on reading and using King James-esque English so much, but we don't really teach people how to.

I would be surprised if most members did not know how to use "wax" in a sentence that way.

Maybe that person is an outlier?

Jonathon · « **Reply #1324 on:** January 03, 2014, 02:45:40 PM »

Quote from: BlackBlade on January 03, 2014, 02:27:29 PM

I would be surprised if most members did not know how to use "wax" in a sentence that way.

Maybe that person is an outlier?

You're probably right. After all "were waxed" occurs not once in the LDS standard works, so it's not like the person who wrote that picked up the phrase without understanding it. They somehow made that up themselves.