Michael S. correctly pointed out that I incorrectly spelled his name in the discussion post about chapter 7. My apologies to him. This is one of the mistakes you do not want to make as a media professional. It is an avoidable error. While it simply was a typographical error and I have spelled his name correctly throughout the rest of the Web site, small mistakes, such as this one, can erode credibility. So, learn from my mistake - always check names.
Michael S. also challenged the use of the word "which" in the following sentence in the same post, offering "that" as a replacement:
"The 300 words don't have to be in one post, meaning I'd prefer that we have several shorter comments which form a discussion on the chapter."
He's correct in replacing "which" with a "that" in this context. If you use "which," it needs a comma. I did not award a point, however, because in replacing "which" with a "that," he also should have sought to omit the first "that" in the sentence.
Posts
How to watch Eagles vs. Commanders online
1 hour ago
2 comments:
Wait...so I don't get the point because I didn't point out another correction? That hardly seems fair.
Actually, your original correction did not go far enough. If I had just fixed the sentence by changing the "which" to a "that," it creates the problem of having two "thats" in the sentence, so your solution made another problem in the sentence slightly worse. Remember, when making fixes, we can't just focus on part of the sentence. The change might have a greater impact on the rest of the sentence and the paragraph that should be considered.
Post a Comment