Douglas South

[Uhtred]

One quote. "if the UK Government reduces their standard VAT rate to below 20%" as an illustration:Analysis:The standard UK VAT rate is 20%If it is reduced it will be below 20%The words "to below 20%" add nothing and are unnecessary. They are prolix and a tautology.In addition UK Government is singular not plural so it should be "reduce"Honestly, every line is like that.

Not that I am defending the use of poor English, indeed, I am fascistic in the opposite direction, but possibly the author included the words "to below 20%" as a reminder to the thickos who cannot remember what the standard rate of VAT is. (Unless that had already been established in the narrative).

[goddess]

I've now received three manifestos. Including ones from both sitting members. One of those is only semil literate, full of basic spelling and grammar errors, lots of we must do x, y and z, but with no costing or methodology. Stupid statements that are tautologous.

John, that is a wonderful post. I can imagine numerous people I know agreeing with you.

I'm ashamed to confess, these days, we put more emphasis on readability than grammatical accuracy.

We often encourage our students to use the Hemingway App. http://www.hemingwayapp.com/ to check for readability.

[Declan]

Grammatical accuracy's point is readability.

[goddess]

Grammatical accuracy's point is readability.

Not necessarily the case Declan.

I would dearly love to agree with you. Unfortunately the relationship between grammatical accuracy and readability isnt as strong as you may wish.

We may, for example, construct a grammatically correct sentence of 30 or more words.

Most people would find such a construct somewhat challenging to understand.

According to Anne Wylie, for example:

when average sentence length is 14 words, readers understand more than 90% of what they’re reading.

When average sentence length is 43 words, readers understand less than 10%.

I would suggest it is much better to make yourself understood than to stress too much about perfect grammar. In that context the Hemingway App is a useful tool for gauging readability.

 

 

Edited for spelling !!!

[Declan]

You're talking about two different things.

 

A grammatically accurate sentence of 30 words is more readable than an ungrammatically accurate one of the same length.

 

Shorter sentences help comprehensiblity too. A reader can get lost in a rambling sentence. But writing that is staccato and shorn of adverbs is a dreadful bore.

[goddess]

You're talking about two different things.

 

A grammatically accurate sentence of 30 words is more readable than an ungrammatically accurate one of the same length.

Agreed !!!

[goddess]

Declan:

You have edited and added to your post since I replied.

I would suggest that might be regarded as bad manners.

For what its worth, anyhow, I had already made the point that shorter sentences enhance readability and understanding.

Doesnt that make your edit redundant?

[quilp]

Lol ...

[paswt]

Declan:

You have edited and added to your post since I replied.

I would suggest that might be regarded as bad manners.

For what its worth, anyhow, I had already made the point that shorter sentences enhance readability and understanding.

Doesnt that make your edit redundant?

 

surprised you have not written in red , and given a mark out of ten, lol

[John Wright]

 

One quote. "if the UK Government reduces their standard VAT rate to below 20%" as an illustration:Analysis:The standard UK VAT rate is 20%If it is reduced it will be below 20%The words "to below 20%" add nothing and are unnecessary. They are prolix and a tautology.In addition UK Government is singular not plural so it should be "reduce"Honestly, every line is like that.

Not that I am defending the use of poor English, indeed, I am fascistic in the opposite direction, but possibly the author included the words "to below 20%" as a reminder to the thickos who cannot remember what the standard rate of VAT is. (Unless that had already been established in the narrative).

It was in the context of threats to national income if the uk reduced VAT rates. The threat is the same whatever the standard rate, and if there is a standard rate a reduction will take the new rate below the standard. There was no need to refer to the standard rate or say what it was. It was waffle. Empty words.

 

The manifesto didn't contain a paragraph without serious spelling, grammar and style issues.

 

What Declan posts about is style. I agree. It isn't just about sentence length, either. For clarity you need to use words with few syllables and, preferably, Anglo Saxon roots rather than Latin. Try and keep sentences below 10 words. Avoid words with more than 3 or 4 syllables. Never use legalese. Short and terse is better than long and rambling. Chris Thomas, please learn.

[notwell]

It'll be Beecroft and Keith Fitton for me. I was thinking of mentioning it to the wife but if I do I know she'll vote differently just to convince herself she is thinking for herself.

 

So I might just mention I'm voting Malarkey. That should be enough to move the vote from her away from him!

[Declan]

Declan:

You have edited and added to your post since I replied.

I would suggest that might be regarded as bad manners.

For what its worth, anyhow, I had already made the point that shorter sentences enhance readability and understanding.

Doesnt that make your edit redundant?

You replied one minute after I posted the original post. I edited it whilst you were replying and finished four minutes after your post. In fact I expanded the post rather than edited it.

 

Your post is "Agreed!!!" and includes a quote. The bit you've quoted is unchanged by my edit. So I don't see what you think I'm misrepresenting. People will think you agree with the bit you are quoting and are making no comment on the bits you aren't.

[OldhamJ]

Four days to go to the election and we've had just one of the four candidates call at the door, not even a "sorry you were out when I called" from the rest. Obviously not too bothered about making an impression.

[Uhtred]

Four days to go to the election and we've had just one of the four candidates call at the door, not even a "sorry you were out when I called" from the rest. Obviously not too bothered about making an impression.

In which case you will no doubt be relaxed about not making an impression alongside their names on the ballot paper.

[j2bad]

Only one person I would vote for out of choice, so the other vote will be on the basis of comedy value.

 

It's a tough year for the best comedy candidate Malarky is 'complete cock' funny, whilst David Fowler is 'not of this world' funny though not sure whether he has peaked too soon, I suppose its kind of humorous voting for anyone called Keith but its just not the standard we expect in South Douglas, what happened to Big Tits, The U-Boat Captain, the burger chef or even that mumbling german in a duffle coat?