So Simple, Yet So Hard...
See how the sense changes with the punctuation in this example:
Tom locked himself in the shed. England lost to Argentina.
These two statements, as they stand, could be quite unrelated. They merely tell you two things have happened, in the past tense.
Tom locked himself in the shed; England lost to Argentina.
We can infer from the semicolon that these events occurred at the same time, although it is possible that Tom locked himself in the shed because he couldn’t bear to watch the match and therefore still doesn’t know the outcome. With the semicolon in place, Tom locking himself in the shed and England losing to Argentina sound like two things that really got on the nerves of someone else. “It was a terrible day, Mum: Tom locked himself in the shed; England lost to Argentina; the rabbit electrocuted itself by biting into the power cable of the washing machine.”
Tom locked himself in the shed: England lost to Argentina.
All is now clear. Tom locked himself in the shed because England lost to Argentina. And who can blame him, that’s what I say.
It is sad to think people are no longer learning how to use the colon and semicolon, not least because, in this supreme QWERTY keyboard era, the little finger of the right hand, deprived of its traditional function, may eventually dwindle and drop off from disuse. But the main reason is that as Joseph Robertson wrote in an essay on punctuation in 1785, "The art of punctuation is of infinite consequence in writing: as it contributes to the perspicuity, and consequently to the beauty, of every composition”. Perspicuity and beauty of composition are not to be sneezed at in this rotten world. If colons and semicolons give themselves airs and graces, at least they also confer airs and graces that the language would be lost without.
From: Eats, Shoots & Leaves, by Lynne Truss.
Tom locked himself in the shed. England lost to Argentina.
These two statements, as they stand, could be quite unrelated. They merely tell you two things have happened, in the past tense.
Tom locked himself in the shed; England lost to Argentina.
We can infer from the semicolon that these events occurred at the same time, although it is possible that Tom locked himself in the shed because he couldn’t bear to watch the match and therefore still doesn’t know the outcome. With the semicolon in place, Tom locking himself in the shed and England losing to Argentina sound like two things that really got on the nerves of someone else. “It was a terrible day, Mum: Tom locked himself in the shed; England lost to Argentina; the rabbit electrocuted itself by biting into the power cable of the washing machine.”
Tom locked himself in the shed: England lost to Argentina.
All is now clear. Tom locked himself in the shed because England lost to Argentina. And who can blame him, that’s what I say.
It is sad to think people are no longer learning how to use the colon and semicolon, not least because, in this supreme QWERTY keyboard era, the little finger of the right hand, deprived of its traditional function, may eventually dwindle and drop off from disuse. But the main reason is that as Joseph Robertson wrote in an essay on punctuation in 1785, "The art of punctuation is of infinite consequence in writing: as it contributes to the perspicuity, and consequently to the beauty, of every composition”. Perspicuity and beauty of composition are not to be sneezed at in this rotten world. If colons and semicolons give themselves airs and graces, at least they also confer airs and graces that the language would be lost without.
From: Eats, Shoots & Leaves, by Lynne Truss.
mauro 3/17/2005
0 Comentários:
Postar um comentário
<< Home