From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search

A subordinate clause starting with “either” is marginally more elegant than one introduced by “whether or not” — one word beats three — but is no more use to anyone who does not suffer from profound ontological uncertainty.

Consider the following - a real life example, with nouns changed to protect identities:

These general terms apply where you are making a payment (either directly or indirectly via a third party) to our investment bank entities, including in the EEA and the UK in connection with the receipt of Research Services (as such term is defined in our Electronic Access Terms (defined below) including material viewed as research a under EU Directive 2014/65/EU (“MiFID II”)) (“Research Services”).

This contains some spectacular linguistic contortions. Padding (“including ...”) is embedded in padding. “Research Services” - defined in a document elsewhere, that document being defined here - is a component of “Research Services” defined here.

But what is most remarkable is how little this confection sets out to achieve in the first place. You could sum it all up with the following:

These terms apply when you pay us for investment bank research in the EEA.

See also

Plain English Anatomy Noun | Verb | Adjective | Adverb | Preposition | Conjunction | Latin | Germany | Flannel | Legal triplicate | Nominalisation | Murder your darlings