Posted by ESC on May 11, 2001
In Reply to: A mnemonic posted by R. Berg on May 11, 2001
: : Since I don't see any major contradiction between R. Berg's rules' exposition and yours (thanks to both), I would tend to consider the basic reasoning (on the restrictive/non-restrictive aspect) as a "rule" proper, and your [ESC] comma/non-comma hint more as a second-guessing, tremendously useful "red-flagging" device.
: : Just a secondary, personal curiosity here. Are you guys (the "aficionados" I mean -- R. Berg, ESC, Bruce Kahl, etc.) mostly from the Uk, or the US? (None of you obviously needs to answer this one).
: : Thanks to all again - this site has been one of my best "discoveries" on the web ever!
: : Massimo Mazzucco
: I'm in the United States.
: I've now generated something that might help by showing the direction in which a change is usually needed:
: If you would see your work in print,
: At every "which" you then must squint.
: On royalties you will grow fat
: By changing many a "which" to "that."
: Indeed, it is no pretty picture
: To read the writing of a whicher,
: And still it is no easy matter
: To change the whicher to a thatter.
: Rules there are, and in abundance,
: Till they reek of their redundance,
: And yet we need a simple guide,
: One that we can keep inside.
: Some experts urge, "Look for the comma,"
: But that may complicate the drama.
: It's not much help, if you don't know
: Just where the comma ought to go.
: Now, when you sit down to compose,
: Whether it be verse or prose,
: Essay, sonnet, sales pitch,
: Remember: "That" instead of "which."
: You write the news? the weather? sports?
: The press release? the crime reports?
: A humble cookbook for the kitchen?
: Just get to work, and stop your whichin'.
Great! How about an entire grammar reference in rhyme? In answer to the location question, I am from the U.S. We have invaded this site.