Similar but not the same
If proofreaders knew anything about English, they would of course be editors, who are paid more and have a marginally less boring job. I often disagree with their marks and have to correct them. An example today is MT's inability to understand why I have written: "Similarly to formal written documents, they are made up of [a list of things presentations are made up of]". She thinks it should read "Similar to". You may well be nodding your head, and if you are, you are wrong, just as she is.What are similar in this sentence? Are "they" and "formal written documents" similar? No. Turning the sentence round illustrates this effectively. Let's say that presentations are made up of "elements". If we do not topicalise the similarity, we have these two choices for the sentence.
"They are made up of elements, similar to formal written documents."
"They are made up of elements, similarly to formal written documents."
But the elements are not similar to formal written documents but to elements that are in formal written documents, so the former must be wrong. What are being compared are the makeups of the two types of thing. They are made up similarly.
The original sentence read "Like formal written documents..." In spoken English, "like" does service for "Similarly to", "as", "such as" and "like". Even a reasonably careful writer, such as myself, will occasionally use "like" where he or she ought to have chosen one of the other words or phrases but in formal writing, the distinctions among them are important.
posted by Dr Zen @ 11:08 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home