[Rhodes22-list] Reply on Art and Rummy erroneous reading

[Michael D. Weisner]

Hank,

I absolutely love your construction "If you do not want your message
misunderstood..."  Essentially you employ a double negative to make your
point.  I had to read it twice to be certain of the meaning.  I was taught
to avoid such constructions since most readers actually read by phrase not
by specific words, sometimes causing a misunderstanding.

As far as the responsibility of the writer to avoid a misunderstanding, I
agree wholeheartedly, although there are many reasons for misunderstandings
in communications, not the least of all is the ambiguous nature of the
language.  If it was truly possible to write a communication that could only
be interpreted in a single manner, we would not require lawyers.

Mike
s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)


From: "Hank" <hnw555 at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 3:31 PM


> Ed,
>
> In the communications classes I have attended, it has always bees stressed
> to me that misinterpretations are the fault of the sender, not the
> receiver.  If you do not want your message misunderstood, then you need to
> craft it in such a way that leaves no room for misunderstanding, not
> criticize the receiver for interpreting an ambiguous message in a way you
> did not intend.
>
> Elle, you are the literary and grammatical; pundit on this list.  What do
> you think?
>
> Hank
>
> On 11/8/06, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Art,
> >      The you in the offending paragraph was meant to be plural and
generic
> > to those who criticized his posts.  It was not intended for you
> > specifically.  However, I guess it is appropriate to put you into the
> > group,
> > as you seem to desire to be there.
> >       Remember when reading my post that all that I say does not come
out
> > in
> > print.  Some English language words are the same spelling in singular
and
> > plural thus offering the unique opportunity to misinterpret.
> >
> > Ed K
> > Greenville, SC, USA
> > Addendum:
> > "No more expensive way of going really slowly has been invented by man
> > than
> > sailing."  Gary Mull
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Arthur H. Czerwonky wrote:
> > >
> > > Rummy,
> > >
> > > What a twist of facts by Ed.  He needs to research the archives,
change
> > > the subject line, and learn not to suggest the absurd - a growing
habit
> > of
> > > his.  I had very pleasant emails with Roger a few months ago and found
> > him
> > > very knowledgeable, helpful, and congenial.  Certainly a techie, but
not
> > > with a know-it-all personna.  I'll look forward to meeting him in the
> > > future.  He would probably be a good re-addition to the list.
> > >
> > > So, Ed, get it together!
> > >
> > > Art
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >>From: R22RumRunner at aol.com
> > >>Sent: Nov 7, 2006 1:21 PM
> > >>To: rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org
> > >>Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Reply on Motor Mount part 2
> > >>
> > >>Ed,
> > >>I don't believe Art is responsible for Roger being "run off the list".
I
> > had
> > >>more of a hand in that than anyone.
> > >>
> > >>Rummy
> > >>__________________________________________________
> > >>Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> >
http://www.nabble.com/Reply-on-Motor-Mount-part-2-tf2590124.html#a7246099
> > Sent from the Rhodes22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list