Author Topic: Eh, what? (Read 6851 times)

Brinestone · « **on:** June 06, 2005, 03:14:27 PM »

I came across this today, and I'm having trouble making sense of it:

A storeroom requisition lists the following information, stored alphabetically within each storeroom location:

Day, date, and meal requested storeroom location
Printed from forecast or census (actual)
Ingredients for the meal selected storeroom amount in the issue unit
Recipes associated with a particular ingredient
Quantity in the recipe unit

First, what the heck does the first (and third, for the same reasons) bullet mean? The requested storeroom location by day, date, and meal? Or something else?

Second of all, what's up with the second bullet? How can a requisition contain "printed from forecast or census"? I'm trying to make this better, but it's not working when I don't know what it means.

I talked to a coworker, and she said dietitians (the target audience) would get it, but I don't believe that. It's grammatical nonsense, so how can anyone get it?

Jonathon · « **Reply #1 on:** June 06, 2005, 03:17:38 PM »

Um . . . wow. That's hardly even English. It's certainly impossible to parse.

To be honest, I don't have the faintest idea what it all means. I think you'll need someone to translate it.

Brinestone · « **Reply #2 on:** June 06, 2005, 03:23:11 PM »

Which I don't want to do because I'm supposed to be proofreading at about 50 pages an hour, and I just don't have time to email or call anyone about this. I guess Medsphere gets to deal with crappy English like this if they're not willing to pay for more time. Gah. I was hoping there would just be something I'm missing.

By the way, how do you make bullets?

Jonathon · « **Reply #3 on:** June 06, 2005, 03:39:37 PM »

You have to have list tags surrounding the list.

Is it possible that in the original, a few bullet points have run together? Maybe it should be something more like this:

Day, date, and meal
Requested storeroom location
Printout from forecast or census (actual)
Ingredients for the meal selected
Storeroom amount in the issue unit
Recipes associated with a particular ingredient
Quantity in the recipe unit

Brinestone · « **Reply #4 on:** June 06, 2005, 03:46:51 PM »

You know, that occurred to me too. I'll check the original to see how it looks.

Brinestone · « **Reply #5 on:** June 06, 2005, 04:00:36 PM »

Aha! The original reads this way:

A Storeroom Requisition prints from the Forecast or Actual Census and contains the following information, stored alphabetically within each storeroom location:

Day, date, and meal requested
Storeroom location
Ingredients for the meal selected
Storeroom amount in the issue unit
Recipes associated with a particular ingredient
Quantity in the recipe unit

Jonathon · « **Reply #6 on:** June 06, 2005, 04:09:39 PM »

So it doesn't even have the bullet item about "printed"?

Brinestone · « **Reply #7 on:** June 06, 2005, 04:16:35 PM »

It's a little notice that the material is printed from that form.

rivka · « **Reply #8 on:** June 06, 2005, 08:23:43 PM »

Transcription is a bear.

And you two are cute.

Brinestone · « **Reply #9 on:** June 07, 2005, 12:59:00 PM »

New question: purgable or purgeable for something able to be purged?

AFR · « **Reply #10 on:** June 07, 2005, 01:22:35 PM »

My vote is the second.

And I agree with rivka. Awww....

Brinestone · « **Reply #11 on:** June 07, 2005, 01:45:33 PM »

Jonathon · « **Reply #12 on:** June 07, 2005, 02:03:22 PM »

The second, definitely. Otherwise you've got a hard g.

And I think AFR is saying that he agrees that we're cute.

Brinestone · « **Reply #13 on:** June 07, 2005, 02:06:51 PM »

I know. I just don't understand why talking about nerdy stuff like editing constitutes cuteness.

Jonathon · « **Reply #14 on:** June 07, 2005, 02:08:23 PM »

I think it's more in how we talk. Or something.

AFR · « **Reply #15 on:** June 07, 2005, 02:47:49 PM »

*nod*

It's because you have conversations with each other on an Internet forum.

Jonathon · « **Reply #16 on:** June 07, 2005, 03:30:49 PM »

Wait—aren't we have a conversation on an internet forum right now?

AFR · « **Reply #17 on:** June 08, 2005, 10:08:44 AM »

Yes, but I don't live with you/see you in person every day.

rivka · « **Reply #18 on:** June 08, 2005, 10:47:10 PM »

Quote

I think it's more in how we talk. Or something.

Pretty much. The fact that it's nerdy editing stuff does raise the cuteness quotient slightly, though.

Brinestone · « **Reply #19 on:** June 16, 2005, 02:26:30 PM »

I have a silly editing question. If you have chili con carne in a title, do you capitalize con? I mean, it's a preposition in Spanish, so I'm thinking you shouldn't. Are there rules about capitalizing parts of speech in other languages?

Jonathon · « **Reply #20 on:** June 16, 2005, 02:31:30 PM »

Other languages have their own rules, and that's generally what you should follow. Check the chapter in Chicago about it. But as a general rule, other languages use capitals more sparingly than English does, so I'd guess con would be lowercased.

AFR · « **Reply #21 on:** June 16, 2005, 02:43:00 PM »

I’d be inclined to put Chili con carne in italics and treat it as one word, i.e. only capitalize Chili.

Jonathon · « **Reply #22 on:** June 16, 2005, 02:54:49 PM »

Ooh, look! It's made it into the dictionary. That means you can simply apply English-style capitalization and not worry about italicizing. I still think I'd lowercase the con, though, for aesthetics' sake and because it really is a preposition.

So wait—is this a hypothetical question? Are you actually editing a software user manual that has "chili con carne" somewhere in it, let alone in a place that requires capitalization?

Brinestone · « **Reply #23 on:** June 16, 2005, 02:58:40 PM »

Yes and yes.

It's the Nutrition and Food Science Superuser's Guide, so there are references to food all over the place. And this particular delicacy made its way into a figure or table heading. I think it was a figure. It was something like "Figure 8: Connecting Chili con Carne to a Menu."

AFR · « **Reply #24 on:** June 16, 2005, 03:06:27 PM »

Spanish is so unimaginative. I mean, they call it "chili with meat." Yeehah. At least English has the sense to make it sound exotic.