Ancient Documentation

An acronym that appears in technical writing circles occasionally is “RTFM,” to remind people to “Read The (ahem) Manual.” Too often people need this reminder.

I found this in a booklet that describes the Antikythera mechanism, an ancient mechanical device that was used for several astronomical calculations:

The Mechanism has a user manual with instructions, like any good instrument or computer. The manual has a mechanical section and an astronomical section. The instructions are written on every available surface of the brass plates of the cover.

https://www.academia.edu/34972240/Antikythera_Mechanism_The_oldest_computer_and_Mechanical_Cosmos_of_the_2_nd_century_BC

I especially like that first sentence. Read your manual!

Here’s a picture from the article. Fortunately, modern typography is somewhat better, leaving you with one less excuse to skip the manual.

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

Another of my hobby horses. This grocery store gets it right. Fewer, not less.

What does your grocery store say???

(FYI, my grocery store says “about 15 items.”)

This time we have a misplaced “Almost.”

Almost constructed entirely of repurposed and recycled scrap materials, Elis set out to create a welcoming villa suitable for parties and guests from his artistic circles. 

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/villa-mehu

Look up “only” in the search box for my pontifications on the subject of where adjectives go—directly before what they modify, not at the beginning of the clause.

As written, the sentence says that the villa wasn’t quite constructed. I’m pretty sure the intent was to refer to the amount of repurposed and scrap materials.

Don’t you do that!

The article has several other pictures.

Remember:

• When you’re counting, use “fewer.”
• When you’re measuring, use “less.”

Unlike this writer (or editor; I’m not sure whom to blame).

After her death, she was exhumed no less than three times and found to be perfectly intact at each, which makes it seem strange that the lovely face and hands that are so famous are actually made of wax.

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/not-quite-incorruptible-st-bernadette-lourdes

Do a search for less or fewer in the upper right corner to find semi-exceptions to this rule.

Here’s a picture:

Short post, and a good example of a grammatical subtlety, both correct and incorrect. From The Washington Post, no less.

The 2020 election will come down to two important questions: Who actually votes, and who do they vote for? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/politics/voter-turnout-270-trump-biden/

The second “who” is incorrect. People commonly use “who” when it’s the first word in a context, even when it should be “whom,” as here. That “who” is the object of the preposition “for.” Put the clause into indicative word order instead of interrogative, and you get “they vote for whom.” Easier to see now, isn’t it? A related trick: replace the “who-whom” with “him.” Now it’s even easier to see.

Even the big guys get it wrong occasionally. Maybe they didn’t want to sound like curmudgeons.