Re: Wanted: Alternate wording for Law 16Bb1(a)
Matthias Berghaus <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.games.bridge.laws |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am 12.07.2016 um 18:44 schrieb Adam Wildavsky: > Here's what the WBF LC is now considering: > > Current: > > …, the partner may not choose from among logical alternatives one that > could demonstrably have been suggested over another by the extraneous > information. > > Proposed: > > …, the partner may not choose a call or play that could demonstrably > have been suggested over another by the extraneous information unless > there is no logical alternative. > > Is it clearer? At least as clear? Any further changes to suggest? I think it is at least as clear, maybe clearer, but - while I have some pride in my command of English - I am not a native speaker, so some nuances may well go right pass me. Having said that, there are many TDs who are not native speakers either, and some of them have worse command of English, and there danger lies. I remember when Robert Geller (AFAIK American-born) couldn`t help the Japanese Federation with their translation because he didn`t understand what the English version said.... So if the proposed version is easier to understand for non-native speakers, then it is an improvement for sure, and I can see where this could well be the case. Some parts of the laws used to be called Grattanese by the British and were considered a foreign language. I was always deeply impressed by what Grattan could do with the English language, and what deep knowledge he has, but if (as sometimes happened) native speakers couldn`t understand his postings here, what chance does someone from another country have? Clarity and easy readability must be the goal, and IMO the proposed version looks like a step on the way. _______________________________________________ Blml mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml