5 ms·
Good. It's a crutch for poorly composed sentences or for prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences. There's not a single sentence under
by viccis 1y ago
Good. It's a crutch for poorly composed sentences or for prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences. There's not a single sentence under the sun that needs an emdash. Commas and parentheses can do it all, and an excess of either is a sign of poorly edited prose.
I don't buy the pro-clanker pro-em dash movement that has come out of nowhere in the past several years.
- esseph 1y agoHm clankers, squids, and bugs?!?
- what 1y ago>pro-em dash movement that has come out of nowhere Bots that are trying to convince you they’re human..
- johnisgood 1y agoMore like humans that are using bots that are trying to convince you they are not using the bots. :D
- jibal 1y ago> prose intending to imitate the affect of poorly composed sentences Anyone who makes errors like this should not be talking.
- slipperydippery 1y agoWhat's the error? I'd hyphenate "poorly-composed" (most wouldn't these days, but they can go to hell) and I think it's a bit too wordy for what it's communicating, but I don't see what I'd call an actual error. I would personally avoid writing that "poorly composed sentences" have an "affect"—rather than the writer having or presenting an affect, or the sentences' tone being affected—as I find an implied anthropomorphizing of "sentences" in that usage, which anthropomorphizing isn't serving enough useful purpose, to my eye, that I'd want it in my writing, but I'm not sure I'd call that an error either. What did you mean? > Commas and parentheses can do it all, and an excess of either is a sign of poorly edited prose. This attitude, however, is a disease of modern English literacy.
- jibal 1y ago> What's the error? a) prose doesn't have intentions ... it should be "prose intended to" b) "effect of", not "affect of" > I don't see what I'd call an actual error. That's a serious problem. It's downright weird that you thought he was actually talking about affect (the noun). This is an old conversation ... I won't revisit it.
- slipperydippery 1y agoI read it as the word aff-ect, not uh-ffect (American pronunciation; both are spelled “affect”). Noun sense of “affect”, not verb. But it’s possible I was reading too generously and this was a botched attempt to employ “effect”, which would also fit (and better, I think).
- viccis 1y agoIt was meant to be "affect," but I'm curious what you think the possible "effect" of poorly written sentences I could have meant?
- viccis 1y ago>b) "effect of", not "affect of" Oh no, oh lord lmao I meant "affect" and not "effect." You need to learn what affect means. I'm not asking you to learn about affect theory, but ffs no part of my sentence implied it meant "effect" and not "affect." Ugh. It doesn't even make sense. What would the "effect" of "poorly composed sentences" be? Only affect makes sense there.
- johnnienaked 1y agoYou know that affect means to have an effect on something right?
- slipperydippery 1y agoThe noun sense does not.
- johnnienaked 1y agoMisused affect/effect there bub
- viccis 1y agoNo "bub" I used it correctly. Review your effect/affect noun distinctions and try again. Google "affect theory" if that makes it easier.
- johnnienaked 1y ago"Poorly constructed sentences" don't have an a-ffect, unless you mean the irritance your poorly constructed sentence brought up in this thread.
- viccis 1y agoAre you telling me the run-on sentence in Ulysses has no affect it is meant to convey?
- johnnienaked 1y agoThe sentence might affect the reader, but it has no affect of itself because a sentence can't have feelings.
- the_af 1y ago> There's not a single sentence under the sun that needs an emdash Sentences "need" very little, but without style and personality, writing becomes very boring. I suppose simplicity without any affectation works for raw communication of plain technical facts, but there's more to writing than that.