mata poisoning [Q]

[timl...@aol.com]

In the recipe section (examples) of a patent relating to lubricating oil
formulations, every sentence seems to begin with mata また, which is
driving me slowly crazy. I am tempted simply to leave it out rather than
commit endless repetitions of "Further", or occasionally, for elegant
literary variation, "Also".

What do others do, I wonder?

Tim
Leeney

[Minoru Mochizuki]

It seems to me many of the events in this world occur independently, without no relation between them, I too wonder what また adds to the context, except all those seemingly indepent events constitute a meaningful group. For example, if the author is listing the occrrences of earthquakes in a relatively limited area, it may be that the aurhor is preparing for introducing his hypothesis for what is happening underground between two plates in that geographical area.　Minoru Mochizuki

 

[kin...@kinsho.co.nz]

I often use "moreover" or "in addition" in this situation....

Eleanor Goldsmith

Sent from my typewriter 

[Jonathan Michaels]

On Saturday, September 22, 2012 7:44:05 PM UTC+9, Tim Leeney wrote:

I am tempted simply to leave it out

I think that's a perfectly good instinct.  When I encounter a また or なお starting a sentence, I first ask myself whether or not a similar conjunction would make the English better, and only if the answer to that is yes do I go on to ask myself which one I want to use.  Depending on the type of writing, the answer could be "no" anywhere from some to most of the time.

Just my two cents.

Jonathan

----------

Jonathan Michaels

Mito, Japan

[Mark Spahn]

Finding the right name for a phenomenon is of great utility,

and Tim Leeney's phrase 「また」中毒 is brilliant

("every sentence seems to begin with mata また,

which is driving me slowly crazy").

And Jonathan Michaels' test "Would such a connective be

present in an equivalent well-written English text?" is

a useful criterion for producing good writing.

 

But my choice is different:  Reproduce every 

start-of-sentence connective that is present in the

source text:  また、なお、しかも、云々.

Remember that a patent is a legal document,

not a literary work, so elegant style is a little value.

If the patent drafter sprinkles his text with (in our

opinion) too many connectives, well, that's just the

way he wanted to write his explanation.

And there's actually some justification for

"mata poisoning" (yuck, sounds like a form of jock itch):

Since the pre-PowerPoint age, every start-of-sentence

また serves as a bullet point.  You and I may be fond

of Lord Acton's dictum "Power corrupts; PowerPoint

corrupts absolutely", but let's give the patent drafter his head.

Related thoughts on Edward Tufte and PowerPoint:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/09/campaign-ads-in-the-powerpoint-era.php

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2012/09/07/jeff-bezos-and-the-end-of-powerpoint-as-we-know-it/

-- Mark Spahn  (West Seneca, NY)

 

[timl...@aol.com]

Thanks to all who joined in this discussion. Good to know one is not
alone. In the event, I decided to follow Mark Spahn's advice (quoted
below).

Regards
Tim Leeney

[Mark Spahn]

> Thanks to all who joined in this discussion. Good to know one is not
> alone. In the event, I decided to follow Mark Spahn's advice (quoted
> below).
> Regards
> Tim Leeney
>

> ... Reproduce every start-of-sentence

> connective that is present in the
> source text: また、なお、しかも、云々.

One further advantage of echoing in the English
translation every start-of-sentence また-like
connective is that doing so marginally reduces
the risk of inadvertently skipping a sentence.