On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 04:11:11PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Neil Conway wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-16-05 at 20:49 +0100, Gregory Stark wrote: > > > "which see" is an unusual formulation but it's actually pretty standard. > > > You > > > see it a lot in older texts. > > > > Interesting, I've never run across it before. It certainly sounds > > awkward to me, but I can revert the change if people would like. > > I don't care either way because the new wording seems OK too, but I as a > non-native speaker found the construct very natural and easy to > understand. It also maps into the latin q.v. verbatim.
Perhaps this is something that sounds better to non-native english speakers than it does to native. I hadn't run across the original, but it certainly grates on my ears. I vote keep the new version. -- Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell) ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
