Another helpful piece at Language Log : it discusses the difficulty that while it is true that split infinitives are actually standard English, the opinionated but misinformed ("the crazies") are sometimes in positions of power and could take against the split infinitive on your job application or mark your dissertation down. The problem is that altering our linguistic behaviour to accommodate their unfounded prejudice only encourages them. So Arnold Zwicky's advice, at the end of it all is this: "The objective fact is that split infinitives are standard English. So my advice is: split an infinitive if it suits you (or don't, if that suits you). Good writers do it. And you don't even have to have a defense for it; do it because it sounds right for you. Don't let the crazies win."
And yet, do we want to risk it? Well one of my tactics has been to have a standard footnote to (a) recognise that 'yes: I have split an infinitive' and (b) it's deliberate because (c) it is standard English and here's a reference or two to demonstrate it (and perhaps mention Shakespeare and Jane Austin, inter alia, used them).
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Spend and tax" not "tax and spend"
I got a response from my MP which got me kind of mad. You'll see why as I reproduce it here. Apologies for the strange changes in types...
-
"'Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell yo...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
-
I'm not sure people have believed me when I've said that there have been discovered uncaffeinated coffee beans. Well, here's one...
No comments:
Post a Comment