[projectaon] Re: Grand Master comment period [Book 13]
- From: Jonathan Blake <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 16:01:07 -0700
On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 4:02 AM, Simon Osborne <outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/04/2012 22:24, Jonathan Blake wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Simon Osborne<outspaced@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> BOOK 13:
>>>
>>> (er) 22: scrabbling his throat -> scrabbling at his throat
>>
>>
>> I don't use "scrabble". Is it incorrect to use it without the "at"?
>
>
> Maybe others know better, but I'm not aware that it is correct with out "at"
> in this context.
Anyone else. Without a definitive reason to change it, I think we
should leave it alone.
>>> (er) 185: spell--Lightning Hand--as -> spell<spell>Lightning
>>> Hand</spell>
>>> as
>>
>>
>> fixed
>
> (ne) 185: Hand</spell>as -> Hand</spell> as [so: ;-) ]
I think that should be fixed. At least I don't see it in my current revision.
>>> You might also want to do a search in 13tplor for instances of ", and"
>>> since
>>> there might be a few occasions where the comma could be lost, going by
>>> recent adjustments to comma usage.
>>
>>
>> Any context in particular? It would take quite a while to go through
>> all the false positives on that search. :)
>
>
> Heh! I was just getting frustrated with the damn spell-checker that seemed
> to be flagging up ", and" in every other Section! Checking with different
> criteria flagged up far fewer instances, most of which are probably correct
> as-is. Nevertheless, here is what I spotted this time:
>
> (er) 62: under the blow, and its four companions -> under the blow and its
> four companions
I think that one's OK.
> (er) 84: these creature are -> these creatures are
fixed
> (er) 85: crude dwellings, and estimate -> crude dwellings and estimate [so:
> probably not.]
fixed
> (er) 186: serves as its mouth, and a long tail -> serves as its mouth and a
> long tail
This one's OK since the long tail is the subject of a new clause.
> (er) 244: over its shoulder, and eagerly -> over its shoulder and eagerly
> [so: probably not?]
fixed
> (er) 265: Upon hearing this the congregation -> Upon hearing this, the
> congregation [so: Maybe?]
It's borderline, but I think that introductory phrase is short enough
to pass without a comma.
> (er) 266: this eerie passageway, and you feel a warmth radiating -> this
> eerie passageway and you feel a warmth radiating [so: Maybe?]
Needs the comma to join the two independent clauses.
> Since checking the rest of the books (14-20) with the original criteria
> flagged up fewer instances, I think they're probably not in need of a second
> pass. Good!
That is good news!
--
Jon
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at http://www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts: