And/or: Difference between revisions

3 bytes added ,  23 November 2016
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 15: Line 15:
}}
}}


And/or is not just ugly; it’s defeatist, because of the presence of the [[virgule]], that whoreson {{|slash}}, which is not even a part of idiomatic punctuation in the English language. It’s a decoration. It has no fixed grammatical meaning. That slash admits that the plain, punctuated words of the English language have defeated you.
And/or is not just ugly; it’s defeatist, because of the presence of the [[virgule]], that whoreson {{tag|slash}}, which is not even a part of idiomatic punctuation in the English language. It’s a decoration. It has no fixed grammatical meaning. That slash admits that the plain, punctuated words of the English language have defeated you.


In fact, that slash means - and can only mean - “{{f|or}}”. So by saying “{{f|and/or}}” you are really saying “and, ''or'' or”. But to be hermetically sealed and consistent, shouldn’t you make one further clarifying step, and say “{{f|and}}, {{f|and/or}} {{f|or}}”?
In fact, that slash means - and can only mean - “{{f|or}}”. So by saying “{{f|and/or}}” you are really saying “and, ''or'' or”. But to be hermetically sealed and consistent, shouldn’t you make one further clarifying step, and say “{{f|and}}, {{f|and/or}} {{f|or}}”?