4 ms·
I much prefer William Safire's treatment linked from that bibliography: http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/20/magazine/jammedtogether-names-inc.html http://www.nyti
by texel 17y ago
I much prefer William Safire's treatment linked from that bibliography: http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/20/magazine/jammedtogether-names-inc.html http://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/20/magazine/jammedtogether-na...
Safire seems to treat the whole thing with a sense of playfulness and levity, as if he realizes that the very purpose of a language is to evolve. Crain's article is preachy and disdainful- he might as well shoo us with a broom and tell us to get off his lawn.
- DanielBMarkham 17y agoSafire's piece is an order-of-magnitude better than this one. He is missed.
- eru 17y agoI like the other one better.
- gabrielroth 17y agoThe tone you call 'preachy and disdainful' I find humorous and self-aware. Likewise the conceit of refusing to print any camel-case terms. "I could print it here to show you, but I refuse to allow my prose to be so disfigured": it's a parody of a grumpy-old-man routine. I assume he's sincere in his distaste for inner caps, but he plainly recognizes that it makes him sound like an old codger, and he's playing that up for comic effect.
- texel 17y agoThat could be, and I certainly did a double-take when I saw this his blog is called "Steamboats are ruining everything." Still, at first blush, any winking and/or nodding was lost on me, and I usually pick up on that kind of stuff.
- jimbokun 17y agoI thought it was pretty clear when he added the part about letting the dog sleep on the sofa.
- s3graham 17y ago"Preachy and disdainful" -- I did not find it so. In fact, close to tongue-in-cheek, more of a "ha ha, just serious". ... "Three! And why not let the dog sleep on the sofa?"