0
Sextus Posted 21 years ago
Grammar
Proofs
Hi, I've received the proofs of a paper and must make some corrections, but I've got a couple of doubts.
1) "Following the line of argument of the second chapter, in the third Polito contends that, as Aenesidemus himself identifies appearances and sense-objects, and considers the latter to be real in contrast to thought-objects, then the relation that PH I 210 establishes between phainesthai and hupachein, and hence between Scepticism and Heracliteanism, becomes clear. For, again, the kind of reality in question does not imply that our sensations are true."
Here, the editor deleted "for". But in this way the link between the two sentences is lost. I suppose that he considers that my use of 'for' is not grammatically correct. Therefore, I’ve thought that perhaps I could say something like this in order to preserve the link: "The reason is, again, that the kind of reality in question..."
2)"The only element they share is the observation that there are conflicts of appearances (this is so at least as far as Sextus’ type of Pyrrhonism is concerned)."
The editor put a comma after 'this is so', but it doesn't sound ok to me.
Thanks,
Sextus
1) "Following the line of argument of the second chapter, in the third Polito contends that, as Aenesidemus himself identifies appearances and sense-objects, and considers the latter to be real in contrast to thought-objects, then the relation that PH I 210 establishes between phainesthai and hupachein, and hence between Scepticism and Heracliteanism, becomes clear. For, again, the kind of reality in question does not imply that our sensations are true."
Here, the editor deleted "for". But in this way the link between the two sentences is lost. I suppose that he considers that my use of 'for' is not grammatically correct. Therefore, I’ve thought that perhaps I could say something like this in order to preserve the link: "The reason is, again, that the kind of reality in question..."
2)"The only element they share is the observation that there are conflicts of appearances (this is so at least as far as Sextus’ type of Pyrrhonism is concerned)."
The editor put a comma after 'this is so', but it doesn't sound ok to me.
Thanks,
Sextus
Top answer
Sextus, I'll just comment that I agree with the editor on the inclusion of a comma after 'this is so'.
- Sextus, I'll just comment that I agree with the editor on the inclusion of a comma after 'this is so'.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
Sextus, I'll just comment that I agree with the editor on the inclusion of a comma after 'this is so'.
00
Hi Davkett,
I'm not sure if you accept my suggestion about 1) or have no opinion about it.
Sextus
I'm not sure if you accept my suggestion about 1) or have no opinion about it.
Sextus
00
I just didn't have enough context, though I can say I didn't much care for the 'for' either. I'm sure you'll hear from others.
00
Having read the two sentences a few times I think that the editor probably felt that there was sufficient linking with the word "again". I would add, if I may, that the words "line of" could also be deleted without any loss of meaning.
I agree with the insertion of the comma.
I agree with the insertion of the comma.
00
Thanks a lot, Forbes, for your comments. Perhaps I could say something like this:
"Following the line of argument of the second chapter, in the third Polito contends that, as Aenesidemus himself identifies appearances and sense-objects, and considers the latter to be real in contrast to thought-objects, then the relation that PH I 210 establishes between phainesthai and h
"Following the line of argument of the second chapter, in the third Polito contends that, as Aenesidemus himself identifies appearances and sense-objects, and considers the latter to be real in contrast to thought-objects, then the relation that PH I 210 establishes between phainesthai and h
0
Related Questions