![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Nov. 6th, 2010 01:06 pmI had a conversation with my mother about problems I have with SAT practice questions. There are a couple that I got wrong that I will stand by my answers on because they're not actually issues of grammar; they're issues of style. This one for instance:
Apparently I'm supposed to change 'no matter what turns you on' to 'no matter which you choose'. No. The test didn't say I was supposed to edit these sentences, it said I was supposed to fix grammar problems. That's a perfectly grammatically correct sentence (though maybe I'd change 'what' to 'which'; I'd have to investigate that). Depending on the tone of the rest of the document, it may be ok, or it may be horribly out of place stylistically. But that's not my problem as a proofreader, and I'm not going to go rewriting people's sentences without their input. What do you think?
Our conversation then turned to discussing why a shalt shaker is a shaker when it doesn't actually do the shaking. It's not even named after the purpose the tool is intended to accomplish, like a coffee grinder. A coffee grinder grinds coffee. A salt shaker doesn't shake the salt, it drops it. Should it be a salt dropper then? Or just a salter? After all, salt's use as a verb is well recognized. But that would make a shovel, then, a shoveler, or a snow-mover (or dirt-mover, as appropriate to the tool). I can imagine salting something with my salter, but not shoveling something with my shoveler. Interesting.
This post brought to you by the typical random and pedantic atmosphere that pervades my parents' house.
Among the many fields of science, no matter what turns you on, there are several fields of study.
Apparently I'm supposed to change 'no matter what turns you on' to 'no matter which you choose'. No. The test didn't say I was supposed to edit these sentences, it said I was supposed to fix grammar problems. That's a perfectly grammatically correct sentence (though maybe I'd change 'what' to 'which'; I'd have to investigate that). Depending on the tone of the rest of the document, it may be ok, or it may be horribly out of place stylistically. But that's not my problem as a proofreader, and I'm not going to go rewriting people's sentences without their input. What do you think?
Our conversation then turned to discussing why a shalt shaker is a shaker when it doesn't actually do the shaking. It's not even named after the purpose the tool is intended to accomplish, like a coffee grinder. A coffee grinder grinds coffee. A salt shaker doesn't shake the salt, it drops it. Should it be a salt dropper then? Or just a salter? After all, salt's use as a verb is well recognized. But that would make a shovel, then, a shoveler, or a snow-mover (or dirt-mover, as appropriate to the tool). I can imagine salting something with my salter, but not shoveling something with my shoveler. Interesting.
This post brought to you by the typical random and pedantic atmosphere that pervades my parents' house.
