[stylist] sample of work rewritten. 3rd attempt.

[Angela fowler]

Fred, in reference to the phrase "exactly the same" or "the exact same" you
are correct about the denotation. It is, by definition, redundant since "the
same" means "alike in every way" or "exactly alike." Where I differ with you
is on the connotation, which is the way in which a phrase is interpreted by
most readers. Unfortunately, and this is probably the part that irritates
you, the phrase "the same" has acquired a looser meaning than its denotation
would suggest. These days "the same" only means very similar whereas "the
exact same" means there is no difference. 

I suppose I will differ with a lot of you on this, since many of you are
fiction writers whereas I'm more an editorial writer I suppose you would
call it, but the main purpose of writing is to effectively communicate. This
means using phrases which, while perhaps not precisely correct, communicate
exactly the message you are trying to convey. 

I'm not saying we should tolerate butchering of the language, nor would I
sacrifice my own standards or suggest that anyone else sacrifice theirs. All
I am saying is, as long as we are communicating effectively and with
eloquence, let's not split hairs over particulars. 

-----Original Message-----
From: stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of Fred Wurtzel
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 6:13 PM
To: 'NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [stylist] sample of work rewritten. 3rd attempt.

Hello,

Redundancies are rarely acceptable.  Use of modifying  words is acceptable.
I guess each writer will decide how to work with rules of grammar.  It is my
suspicion that the editors who pay writers have their standards, also.  

Warmest Regards,

Fred

-----Original Message-----
From: stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:stylist-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
Behalf Of James Canaday M.A. N6YR
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 6:22 PM
To: NFBnet Writer's Division Mailing List
Subject: Re: [stylist] sample of work rewritten. 3rd attempt.

not always.  sometimes redundancies serve to emphasize, or are necessary for
flow in a particular passage.
jc

Jim Canaday M.A.
Lawrence, KS

At 01:00 PM 10/27/2008, you wrote:
>Our language has lots of redundancies.   Good writers will spot and
eliminate
>them.
>Lori
>In a message dated 10/26/08 11:29:14 PM, f.wurtzel at comcast.net writes:
>
>
> > Hi Jim,
> >
> > I agree it is common and, in my opinion, redundant.  Many people 
> > also
say
> > "refer back" or "remand back" which are
> clearly bad usage by virtue of their
> > redundancy.  I feel "exact same" falls into the same category.
> >
> > Warm Regards,
> >
> > Fred
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>**************
>Play online games for FREE at Games.com! All of your favorites, no 
>registration required and great graphics ­ check it out!
>(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1211202682x1200689022/aol?redi
>r=
>http://www.games.com?ncid=emlcntusgame00000001)
>_______________________________________________
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/n6yr%40sunflow
>er.c
om


_______________________________________________
stylist mailing list
stylist at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
stylist:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/f.wurtzel%40comcast
.net

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. 
Version: 7.5.549 / Virus Database: 270.8.4/1749 - Release Date: 10/27/2008
7:57 AM
 


_______________________________________________
stylist mailing list
stylist at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
stylist:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/fowlers%40syix.com