3 ms·
Writing 'eg' instead of 'e.g.' or 'ie' instead of 'i.e.' is just dumb, though. So is confusing the two.
by wtbob 10y ago
Writing 'eg' instead of 'e.g.' or 'ie' instead of 'i.e.' is just dumb, though. So is confusing the two.
- csours 10y ago1. Not everyone is a fluent English reader. If you are providing government services, you have to provide them to "dumb" people as well. "Dumb" in this case includes a lot of smart people who were not raised with English as their first language. 2. There is no official version of the English language. Pronunciations, spellings and style guides change over time. Disclaimer: This post is subject to Muphry's Law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law
- wtbob 10y ago> Not everyone is a fluent English reader. I.e. & e.g. aren't English, but rather Latin. Any educated person in the Western world should understand them, no?
- manarth 10y agoThe Economist recommends "eg" (no full-stops) in its style-guide[1]. As does the Guardian/Observer[2], and the University of Cambridge[3]. There are counter-examples, such as AP and NYT, but this usage - without full-stops - is not uncommon or abnormal. [1] http://www.economist.com/style-guide/abbreviations http://www.economist.com/style-guide/abbreviations [2] https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-e https://www.theguardian.com/guardian-observer-style-guide-e [3] https://www.cam.ac.uk/brand-resources/guidelines/editorial-style-guide https://www.cam.ac.uk/brand-resources/guidelines/editorial-s...