phatj wrote:PSA:

weary =/= wary

i am weary of this advice

JUburton wrote:

phatj wrote:PSA:

weary =/= wary

i am weary of this advice

i am weary a scarf today

At the bottom of an article on foreignpolicy.com it said

"Like this article? Read an unlimited amount of articles when you Subcribe to FP Premium"

ATTN GRAMMAR (or style??) NERDS:

BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today announced the company will present at the conference for BLANK.

OR

BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today announced THAT the company will present at the conference for BLANK.

blanks included for anonymity.

JUburton wrote:ATTN GRAMMAR (or style??) NERDS:

BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today announced the company will present at the conference for BLANK.

OR

BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today announced THAT the company will present at the conference for BLANK.

blanks included for anonymity.

I find the THAT to be unnecessarily gratuitous.

Though I tend to be wordy so I'd probably write it that way and then, I hope, edit it out.

"That" in the second sentence is superfluous.

i completely agree it is grammatically unnecessary. but stylistically i hate the phrase 'today announced the company'.

So it really bothers me when I like a song a lot and it has a grammar flub that I can't get over that is ALWAYS used in music: "that" instead of "who"

EXAMPLE: Hornets! Hornets! by The Hold Steady. "PEOPLE TOUCHIN PEOPLE THAT THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW YO"

which/that is my hell

edited a resolution my boss sent me, tore it to shred. she unnecessarily capitalized no less than 25 words in a two page document.

JUburton wrote:i completely agree it is grammatically unnecessary. but stylistically i hate the phrase 'today announced the company'.

Change it to 'today announced the fact that the company'

Seriously,if the word doesn't contribute to the meaning of the sentence, it bothers me more if it isn't left out. It's already constrained by the conventions of company press announcements. Might as well make it as sleek as possible.

CalvinBall wrote:edited a resolution my boss sent me, tore it to shred. she unnecessarily capitalized no less than 25 words in a two page document.

this is why you don't get called out in the thank you emails

JUburton wrote:i completely agree it is grammatically unnecessary. but stylistically i hate the phrase 'today announced the company'.

Hmmm. I would say that it is technically grammatically necessary, because "the company will present at the conference for BLANK" is a relative subordinate clause, requiring a relative pronoun to introduce it, although this pronoun is often taken as read in practice.

mozartpc27 wrote:

JUburton wrote:i completely agree it is grammatically unnecessary. but stylistically i hate the phrase 'today announced the company'.

Hmmm. I would say that it is technically grammatically necessary, because "the company will present at the conference for BLANK" is a relative subordinate clause, requiring a relative pronoun to introduce it, although this pronoun is often taken as read in practice.

I don't think "that" is functioning as a relative pronoun here, though. What is it standing in for, if so? It's neither describing the company nor the conference. I think it's just working as a complementizer here. In that case, you leave it in if it helps clarify, and you can safely remove it if it's unnecessary.

If the sentence were structured, BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today made an announcement that the company will present at the conference for BLANK, then yes, I think it would be necessary.

Interesting stuff.

swishnicholson wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:

JUburton wrote:i completely agree it is grammatically unnecessary. but stylistically i hate the phrase 'today announced the company'.

Hmmm. I would say that it is technically grammatically necessary, because "the company will present at the conference for BLANK" is a relative subordinate clause, requiring a relative pronoun to introduce it, although this pronoun is often taken as read in practice.

I don't think "that" is functioning as a relative pronoun here, though. What is it standing in for, if so? It's neither describing the company nor the conference. I think it's just working as a complementizer here. In that case, you leave it in if it helps clarify, and you can safely remove it if it's unnecessary.

If the sentence were structured, BLANK, Inc., a surgical company leading the development of BLANK, today made an announcement that the company will present at the conference for BLANK, then yes, I think it would be necessary.

Interesting stuff.

Yes, I stand corrected. Indirect quotation is what this is, and the relative pronoun, while permissible, is not required. Doesn't really add anything either.

My grammar died many years ago (both of them, in fact).

Well, everyone's entitled to two, aren't they?

I could care less.

swishnicholson wrote:unnecessarily gratuitous.

explain necessarily gratuitous ? (entirety of the internet aside)

not an annoyance, just an observation.

is it only philly where the term "high school" is turned into one word, like "hisekool"? I've always said it that way, and it always struck me as odd when I'd hear someone on TV or in a movie pronounce is as two distinct words....