Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 1 Jun 2009 13:01:03 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 08:39 a.m. 1/06/2009, Peter Adams wrote:
>I've never understood some teachers' constraints on first person, so
>I look forward to reading the replies to Paul's post.
DD: Very formal, legal talk. "The party of the first part." "The
party of the second part." Is that what you mean? (Except in quoting
verbatim transcriptions of testimony.) I have seen the move to
plural first person as in the Royal We and the POTUS We. Seems a bit
arrogant to me, unless you are royalty.
>I also wonder about contractions. I tell my students that they
>shouldn't use them in very formal writing or when writing to an
>audience that thinks they shouldn't be used.
DD: Write to your reader. Want to offend them, then use forms you think will.
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
|
|