 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / November 2009James: he was at last ....
Hello: I have a difficulty connecting "he was at last ..." to the rest of the sentence. Where/which are the grammatical connectors? ----- [Miss Gostrey hadn't been able to satisfy Strether's curiosity about Mme Vionnet and her daughter, whom she personally knew, since he, in his turn, hadn't provided the name of the "person of interest." He didn't have it either, as Chad had kept him in the dark.] [...] who should ces dames prove to be but persons about whom—once thus face to face with them—she found she might from the first have told him almost everything? This would have freely come had he taken the simple precaution of giving her their name. There could be no better example—and she appeared to note it with high amusement—than the way, making things out already so much for himself, he was at last throwing precautions to the winds. They were neither more nor less, she and the child's mother, than old school-friends [...] Henry James, The Ambassadors, p. 141 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/432/432-h/432-h.htm ----- -- Thanks. Marius Hancu > Hello: > > I have a difficulty connecting "he was at last ..." to the rest of the > sentence. Where/which are the grammatical connectors? This does not come as a shock. > ----- > [Miss Gostrey hadn't been able to satisfy Strether's curiosity about [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > throwing precautions to the winds. They were neither more nor less, > she and the child's mother, than old school-friends [...] There could be no better example [...] than the way [...] (in which) he was at last throwing precautions to the winds. Can I ask you to separate out the dashes with spaces? It's very difficult for BrE readers to scan this: - persons about whom—once thus face to face with them—she found she might from the first have told him almost everything Which seems to include two strange, hyphenated words: "whom-once" and "them-she".  SignatureDavid > > ----- > > [Miss Gostrey hadn't been able to satisfy Strether's curiosity about [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > There could be no better example [...] than the way [...] (in which) he > was at last throwing precautions to the winds. OK, I felt the need for "in which" myself, but wasn't sure. Question is, is it recommended or it's something naturally left out, esp these days? I don't want to be redundant. > Can I ask you to separate out the dashes with spaces? I hate that myself. Unfortunately it shows up in print. I'll try to do that in the future. Thanks. Marius Hancu >>> ----- >>> [Miss Gostrey hadn't been able to satisfy Strether's curiosity about [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > > Can I ask you to separate out the dashes with spaces? That spaceless em-dash is standard typographical usage in the USA and the OUP. SignatureJames >>>> ----- >>>> [Miss Gostrey hadn't been able to satisfy Strether's curiosity about [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >That spaceless em-dash is standard typographical usage in the USA and >the OUP. Yebbut. The dashes in what Marius quoted are represented on usenet by hyphens. They give every impression of linking rather than separating. There was at one time a suggestion of representing en-dashes by two hyphens, --, and em-dashes by three, ---. [...] who should ces dames prove to be but persons about whom---once thus face to face with them--she found she might from the first have told him almost everything? To my taste two hyphens would be sufficient for an em-dash. [...] who should ces dames prove to be but persons about whom--once thus face to face with them-she found she might from the first have told him almost everything? However, I'm with David in preferring " - " to represent an em-dash. [...] who should ces dames prove to be but persons about whom - once thus face to face with them - she found she might from the first have told him almost everything? SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>> On Nov 29, 7:51 am, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > hyphens. They give every impression of linking rather than > separating. They remain em-dashes on my computer, but I now realise that this isn't the case for everyone. Let's just test again: example—and Has that changed to this? example-and SignatureJames >>>> On Nov 29, 7:51 am, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> >>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > >example-and At first glance there was no obvious difference between them. I view usenet messages using a fixed-pitch font. The em-dash is fractionally longer than a hyphen. The em-dash is a full character width. The hyphen is less (a sliver of space at each end). Looking closely at your examples I can see a difference. Also looking closely, I can see that Marius's quoted text has em-dashes rather than hyphens. With my newsreader settings a series of em-dashes is displayed as an unbroken line. A series of hyphens gives a broken line. ---------- Those two lines are the same length on the screen. Each hyphen is directly beneath the dash above. I have tried switching to a variable-pitch font for displaying messages. The em-dashes appear as, um, em-dashes. They are approximately three times "normal" character width. SignaturePeter Duncanson, UK (in alt.usage.english) >>>>> On Nov 29, 7:51 am, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> >>>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > width. The hyphen is less (a sliver of space at each end). Looking > closely at your examples I can see a difference. Ah, there's the difference. I see messages in Times. SignatureJames >>>> On Nov 29, 7:51 am, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> >>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > example—and > example-and Very slight difference here, but not obvious at first glance. The letters are all lined up, along to the d, but the dash touches the e and a in the first version, whereas there is a tiny gap in the second. I see now that Marius's quotes are actually the same as your first example, but I didn't recognise this before, SignatureDavid >>>>> On Nov 29, 7:51 am, the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> >>>>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > I see now that Marius's quotes are actually the same as your first > example, but I didn't recognise this before, I see it just like that to, and (particularly in the James stuff, as he seems to feel the need to use a lot of them - presumably having run out of commas, semicolons and other ways of embedding yet more, sometimes somewhat, although not entirely - though of course you might (were you me) disagree, unnecessary, subclauses in his writing) had been thinking about making a similar plea. That you should read Usenet in a fixed-spaced font is an Old Rule well, not that old I suppose. ^^^ And it sill has its uses. SignatureOnline waterways route planner: http://canalplan.org.uk development version: http://canalplan.eu >> > Can I ask you to separate out the dashes with spaces? > > That spaceless em-dash is standard typographical usage in the USA and > the OUP. Oh sure, I know. But it's not standard in Warrington, and my fixed-pitch font gives me a hyphen, which I find intensely difficult to scan-read. SignatureDavid |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.