-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 324
Code of Conduct: "Well actually" #1100
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
well actually :-), I think the original is probably correct it's a pretty unusual construction, taking a phrase in quotes and turning it into a noun, and then pluralizing it, too. so I'm not 100% confident what the "correct" orthography should be, but any rate, the current form isn't a typo |
I agree, and ran it past others. I guess typo is not quite right, but it sure looks awkward...even if maybe more accurate. I'm game one way or the other. Let me know if you prefer closing instead? |
I don't think I have ever heard "well actually" used as a noun phrase, and a little Googling seems to indicate that it isn't a common usage (I couldn't find any examples) so perhaps it would be best to simply remove the entire parenthetical? I don't think it adds much value if any, and it is probably confusing to non-native speakers, or others who aren't already familiar with the "well actually" phrase/joke/meme (which the text does not adequately explain; nor is it worth taking the time, in this context, to adequately explain it) |
agree |
According to normal rules of English grammar, you can't pluralize a quoted statement at all (even if "Hello, world!"s is clear to pretty much any programmer, and our audience is programmers). The rules aren't entirely consistent about quoting-with-apostrophe, but when it is done, it's done with a single word (not a phrase) and no quotes. The advice, instead, is to reword to avoid such an awkward construct, and only use apostrophe to pluralize single letters. (E.g. m's rather than ms, though of course programmers probably understand 'm's better!) Since here, the awkward grammar is coupled with not-widely-understood-meaning, we should take the rewrite advice. Probably by deleting the parenthetical phrase entirely, though it does form a nice cognitive break from an otherwise dull list, and provokes thought where otherwise people might just go, "yeah, whatever, so much blah blah blah". |
as discussed at scala#1100
closing in favor of #1103, then. thanks, Justin, for bringing this to our attention |
No description provided.