3 ms·

I downvoted this comment because found the parent's comment more natural/conversational, and I believe you improved neither the sentence construction nor the co

by ronaldx 13y ago

I downvoted this comment because found the parent's comment more natural/conversational, and I believe you improved neither the sentence construction nor the comment thread.

jaggederest 13y ago
I'm just trying to be friendly and helpful. My friends who speak English as a second language have solicited my help in the past, so I've generalized that. Usually get good reactions from people since English is difficult. The GP post definitely didn't scan cleanly for me, and I had to think about what the intended meaning was for a minute before I understood it, so I was trying to help avoid confusion.
- FreakLegion 13y ago
  I don't doubt your intentions, but the original really is better, stylistically. Try restoring the conversational deletion[1]: So then there come a lot of people, [who] just put in 2 euros, demand their ice and soda, and as soon as they eat the ice, they vanish. Now you don't have to wallow in all those awkward participles, which are almost without exception weaker than direct constructions. (You might want to omit the second 'they', but conversationally it adds a nice flavor, and certainly isn't wrong.) 1. http://english.stackexchange.com/a/66994 http://english.stackexchange.com/a/66994
  - jaggederest 13y ago
    I just don't know anyone who would actually speak that way, nor have I ever seen writing deliberately like that save possibly as a stylistic thing. Omitting the cream from ice cream is completely strange. Ice is more of a modifying element there - it's iced coffee, you'd just say coffee, not 'iced' by itself. I often see 'icecream' as a single word, in fact. I didn't mean to get into a long aside though, I just wanted to help someone out. I should have known that here I would get overanalysis instead of people just ignoring it if they didn't appreciate it.

3 ms·

I downvoted this comment because found the parent's comment more natural/conversational, and I believe you improved neither the sentence construction nor the co

by ronaldx 13y ago

I downvoted this comment because found the parent's comment more natural/conversational, and I believe you improved neither the sentence construction nor the comment thread.

jaggederest 13y ago
I'm just trying to be friendly and helpful. My friends who speak English as a second language have solicited my help in the past, so I've generalized that. Usually get good reactions from people since English is difficult. The GP post definitely didn't scan cleanly for me, and I had to think about what the intended meaning was for a minute before I understood it, so I was trying to help avoid confusion.
- FreakLegion 13y ago
  I don't doubt your intentions, but the original really is better, stylistically. Try restoring the conversational deletion[1]: So then there come a lot of people, [who] just put in 2 euros, demand their ice and soda, and as soon as they eat the ice, they vanish. Now you don't have to wallow in all those awkward participles, which are almost without exception weaker than direct constructions. (You might want to omit the second 'they', but conversationally it adds a nice flavor, and certainly isn't wrong.) 1. http://english.stackexchange.com/a/66994 http://english.stackexchange.com/a/66994
  - jaggederest 13y ago
    I just don't know anyone who would actually speak that way, nor have I ever seen writing deliberately like that save possibly as a stylistic thing. Omitting the cream from ice cream is completely strange. Ice is more of a modifying element there - it's iced coffee, you'd just say coffee, not 'iced' by itself. I often see 'icecream' as a single word, in fact. I didn't mean to get into a long aside though, I just wanted to help someone out. I should have known that here I would get overanalysis instead of people just ignoring it if they didn't appreciate it.