Return-Path: <root> Received: (from root@localhost) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) id f7VBr2v09461 for health-archive@nifl.gov; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Resent-Message-Id: <200108311153.f7VBr2v09461@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from thehub.capcollege.bc.ca (rtr-22.CapCollege.BC.CA [134.87.22.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f2JJJng11245 for <nifl-health@nifl.gov>; Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:19:50 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <fc.0024a09a00aade853b9aca00852cac6d.aadeb3@TheHub.capcollege.bc.ca> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 11:19:39 -0800 Subject: Re: [NIFL-HEALTH:2927] Easy to read vs. grammatically incorrect To: nifl-health@nifl.gov From: knonesuch@TheHub.capcollege.bc.ca (Kate Nonesuch) References: <sab60d7c.001@GMHMNW5DC005> In-Reply-To: <sab60d7c.001@GMHMNW5DC005> Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-From: root@literacy.nifl.gov Resent-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 07:53:02 -0400 Resent-To: health-archive@nifl.gov Status: O Content-Length: 659 Lines: 21 nifl-health@nifl.gov writes: >This medicine is only for the child for whom it is prescribed. >vs. >This medicine is only for the child the doctor gives it to. (?) >Only give this medicine to the child it is ordered for. (?) I'd go with the second one. I try to be grammatically correct, but I always choose to use ordinary language, even if it is not "correct." What about this? (I'm sure everyone on the list has a favorite way to think about such problems.) This medicine is for the child whose name is on the bottle. Don't give it to any other child. Kate Nonesuch Reading and Writing Centre Malaspina University-College Cowichan Campus Duncan, BC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Jan 18 2002 - 11:28:28 EST