2 ms·

I couldn't bring myself to read it. I think you summarize my instinctive/intuitive/gut-level reaction. (Literally gut level, which is why I stopped.) This re

I couldn't bring myself to read it. I think you summarize my instinctive/intuitive/gut-level reaction. (Literally gut level, which is why I stopped.) This reminds me so much of what I hate about much of the pedagogy of "writing". Formulaic writing is just that, formulaic. It may work well in the artifice of a classroom; not so much in the real world. Strictures can be useful, e.g. in technical documentation. But even there, it takes some creativity to communicate clearly and effectively. "No more than two em dashes per paragraph" simply doesn't cut it. Oh, and to the author of the Slate article: Allow me to introduce you to the en dash –. Buwahaha...

chalst 15y ago
"gut-level" - Let's say this is the stylistic equivalent of a fart joke. I think it worked well enough Rather firm limits on the density of em dashes are fair, because there's a typographical issue of avoiding "horizontal rivers": the distracting effect of dashes varies nonlinearly with their number. An upper limit of two, per Chicago, or three, is a good usage stricture; there is practically never a strong reason to violate it. "en dash" - Fair enough, but she's following AP style, which uses em dashes.
- pasbesoin 15y ago
  I didn't actually use the en dash in an appropriate context, such as "1 – 7". I don't use em dashes profusely. However, I'm reminded of bumping into arbitrary rules that mandated rewriting something into a more awkward form in order to comply with the rules. There is a certain subset of instructors who confuse students with rules more than they aid them in learning to communicate clearly. As for the style guides. Well, I don't know how things are these days, but there was also a not insignificant portion of pedagogy devoted to blind adherence to one or another. All the more confusing when a young student is not really working in a context that allows the student to see where, how, and why the rules make sense. Cart before the horse, I guess I might say.

chalst 15y ago

"gut-level" - Let's say this is the stylistic equivalent of a fart joke. I think it worked well enough Rather firm limits on the density of em dashes are fair, because there's a typographical issue of avoiding "horizontal rivers": the distracting effect of dashes varies nonlinearly with their number. An upper limit of two, per Chicago, or three, is a good usage stricture; there is practically never a strong reason to violate it. "en dash" - Fair enough, but she's following AP style, which uses em dashes.

pasbesoin 15y ago
I didn't actually use the en dash in an appropriate context, such as "1 – 7". I don't use em dashes profusely. However, I'm reminded of bumping into arbitrary rules that mandated rewriting something into a more awkward form in order to comply with the rules. There is a certain subset of instructors who confuse students with rules more than they aid them in learning to communicate clearly. As for the style guides. Well, I don't know how things are these days, but there was also a not insignificant portion of pedagogy devoted to blind adherence to one or another. All the more confusing when a young student is not really working in a context that allows the student to see where, how, and why the rules make sense. Cart before the horse, I guess I might say.