[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [partman-target] proposal to change template to fix bad wording


Justin B Rye <justin.byam.rye@gmail.com> wrote:
> Holger Wansing wrote:
> > I have one more proposal on my agenda for template changes.
> > 
> > "Two file systems are assigned the same label (${LABEL}): ${PART1} and ${PART2}.
> > resp.
> (This, by the way, is one of those uses of "respectively" that doesn't
> work in English!)
> > "Two file systems are assigned the same mount point (${MOUNTPOINT}): ${PART1} 
> > and ${PART2}."
> > 
> > I am of course not a native English speaker, but I believe there is some bad 
> > wording here? 
> No, that *is* acceptable English, 

In that case, I would prefer to do no changing at all.
No one has complained about it, except from me :-)


> though it might nonetheless be worth
> avoiding - it's effectively saying "two file systems are in a state of
> having been assigned the same X" (remember that English verbs like
> "give/assign" can passivise in either of two ways: "I was given a
> name" or "a name was given to me").
> Your suggested revised versions begin to feel a bit longwinded.  If
> this bit is going to cause any trouble it might be better to throw it
> out completely and just say something like:
>   "Two file systems have the same label (${LABEL}): ${PART1} and ${PART2}."
>   "Two file systems have the same mount point (${MOUNTPOINT}): ${PART1} and ${PART2}."
> -- 
> JBR	with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
> 	sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package

Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org>
PGP-Fingerprint: 496A C6E8 1442 4B34 8508  3529 59F1 87CA 156E B076

Reply to: