How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a" before "stenographer"? ;)
Reading a novel "The standard of living", by Dorothy Parker, I read this:
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from the day that Midge
had found a job as stenographer with the firm that employed Annabel.
----- The end of the citation -----
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a" before "stenographer"? ;)
Reading a novel "The standard of living", by Dorothy Parker, I read this:"stenographer"? ;)
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from the day that Midge
had found a job as stenographer with the firm that employed Annabel.
----- The end of the citation -----
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a" before
Reading a novel "The standard of living", by Dorothy Parker, I read this:;
-----Beginning of the citation-----
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from the day that Midge
had found a job as stenographer with the firm that employed Annabel.
----- The end of the citation -----
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a" before "stenographer"?
Others have said it is fine. I think it reads like broken English, like someone wrote it that is not a native speaker. I would expect a "the" in front of it if she was the only one, and "a" if there might be more than one with the firm.
I might point out that Dorothy Parker was not a paragon
of English writing.
Dorothy Parker (nee Rothschild; August 22, 1893 - June
7, 1967) was an American poet, writer, critic, and
satirist based in New York; she was best known for her
wit, wisecracks, and eye for 20th-century urban foibles. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Parker)
Reading a novel "The standard of living", by Dorothy
Parker,
I read this:
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from
the day that Midge had found a job as stenographer
with the firm that employed Annabel.
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a"
before "stenographer"? ;)
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult case
How can you explain "the secretary", "treasurer", and "president"?
I read this:
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from the day that
Midge had found a job as stenographer with the firm that employed
Annabel.
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a"
before "stenographer"? ;)
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult case in Oscar
Wilde's play "An Ideal Husband":
Mabel Chiltern: But it is for an excellent charity: in aid
of the Undeserving, the only people I am really
interested in. I am the secretary, and Tommy Trafford is
treasurer.
Mrs. Cheveley: And what is Lord Goring?
Mabel Chiltern: Oh! Lord Goring is president.
How can you explain "the secretary", "treasurer", and "president"?
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult case
Omit "have".
Mabel Chiltern: But it is for an excellent charity: in
aid of the Undeserving, the only people I am really
interested in. I am the secretary, and Tommy
Trafford is treasurer.
Mrs. Cheveley: And what is Lord Goring?
Mabel Chiltern: Oh! Lord Goring is president.
How can you explain "the secretary", "treasurer", and
"president"?
It would seem that they have formed a society (whether
formal or informal) that requires an executive -- a
president, secretary, and treasurer.
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult caseOmit "have".
The information about the case is connected with the
present time (you haven't put the time mark). Therefore,
IMHO, the present perfect time was correct.
Indeed, a charity. But I was asking why in the dialog above
"secretary" is modifed by the definite article, whereas
"treasurer" and "president" are not.
|hardly?On my way to work I have encountered a difficult case
Omit "have".
The information about the case is connected with the
present time (you haven't put the time mark). Therefore,
IMHO, the present perfect time was correct.
No, the Present Perfect is harly
possible here because "on my way to work" clearly
indicates a past time and makes the whole sentence
narrative.
I read this:
Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from
the day that Midge had found a job as stenographer
with the firm that employed Annabel.
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a"
before "stenographer"? ;)
As for president - my textbook says an article is
unnecessary in official job titles, if there is only
one person holding this position at any given time.
I read this: Annabel and Midge had been best friends almost from
the day that Midge had found a job as stenographer with the firm
that employed Annabel.
How can I explain to my conscience the absence of "a"
before "stenographer"? ;)
[...]
As for president - my textbook says an article is unnecessary in
official job titles, if there is only one person holding this
position at any given time.
IMHO you answered your own question there. Depending on the size of
the firm, one stenographer... i.e. a person who can take dictation
in shorthand & type it out at a fairly impressive rate... may have
been enough. I don't see any evidence indicating Annabel had been
employed in the same capacity.
Not to worry. It's often said in the EdBiz that before knowing what questions to ask we must already know at least half of the
answer... [chuckle].
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult caseOmit "have".
The information about the case is connected with the present time
(you haven't put the time mark). Therefore, IMHO, the present
perfect time was correct.
No, the Present Perfect is harly possible here because "on my way
to work" clearly indicates a past time and makes the whole sentence narrative.
On my way to work I have encountered a difficult
case
Omit "have".
The information about the case is connected with the
present time (you haven't put the time mark).
Therefore, IMHO, the present perfect time was correct.
No, the Present Perfect is harly [AS: hardly] possible
here because "on my way to work" clearly indicates a
past time and makes the whole sentence narrative.
IMHO the issue may have a lot to do what is or isn't a
"time marker".
I regard your correction as an improvement because I
imagine you mean something along the lines of "On my way
to work today, before I was able to relax at home &
catch up on my echomail, I noticed [blah blah] in the
comedy of manners I was reading on the bus".
Alexander may be thinking more of Freddy in MY FAIR
LADY, who informs the audience "I have often walked down
this street before".... :-)
Oh, sorry -- I misunderstood your question!
I think it's been answered, then...
in a string of nouns like that, it's permissible to use
the article only for the first noun.
I also don't see any evidence indicating Annabel|is in as unique a position
had been employed in the same capacity, but IMHO
also there is no ground to suggest that a stenographer
is as unique position in a firm as its President.
I also don't see any evidence indicating Annabel had been employed
in the same capacity, but IMHO also there is no ground to suggest
that a stenographer is as unique position in a firm as its
President.
|is in as unique a position
The title of "president" certainly sounds more formal, and is often capitalized. With other job titles, however, the situation may be
less clear. "Secretary of State" is an official role which is held
by only one person at a time... yet the word "secretary" may be
used to describe any of four employees in a large high school. The question in my mind is whether or not the article can correctly be
omitted if I'm referring to the secretary, teacher-librarian, etc.
at a much smaller school... or to the proprietor of Giovanni's
Bistro. I must say I found the omission of the article in your
example surprising, but I can see justfication for it if it's
optional there & the novelist wants to get on with the show ASAP
after filling in a bit of the background....
Four centuries ago, other writers left out "the" in:
Where is he that is born King of the Jews?
-- Matt. 2:2, KJV
The Tragedie of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark
-- Wm. Shakespeare
We could have a great time discussing why Herod saw Jesus as a
potential rival and whether or not Hamlet was the last of his line,
but my point is that AFAIK native speakers of English have been
leaving out "the" in situations where the rationale is not
immediately obvious for quite awhile now. The rule you cited
mentions two important factors... the uniqueness of the job & the formality of the job description. In everyday life things may not
be quite so simple. But as long as you know rules have exceptions I
can't think of a better one. :-))
I also don't see any evidence indicating Annabel had been
employed in the same capacity, but IMHO also there is no ground
to suggest that a stenographer is as unique position in a firm
as its President.
|is in as unique a position
Maybe it is better to remove "position"?:
"...but, IMHO, also there is no ground to suggest that a stenographer
is as unique in a firm as its President."
A good stenographer is worth a dozen typists. That is to say, a
good stenographer would take systematically evaluating a dozen
typists, and even then that dozen may fail to possess the required
skills.
But stenographers and typists do different job. A stenographer doesn't type his texts; they write speeches down by hand using the special stenographic symbols and tricks. The only problem is that nobody can
read their scripts. ;-)
But stenographers and typists do different job. A stenographer
doesn't type his texts; they write speeches down by hand using the
special stenographic symbols and tricks. The only problem is that
nobody can read their scripts. ;-)
Neither can I. That's why they - did- type from their own notes! I
don't know who told you that they didn't. Did Ardith? Naughty. ;)
Although the 'chicken scratchings' form that steno notes may start
by using a standard script, often the person would insert their own symbology to account for in-house terms and abbreviations, for
example.
It's similar to the medical field where there is a notation form
for even the specification of patients' medication. Ask a nurse, pharmacist or doctor (? maybe) how their 'shorthand' looks for a
typical example for: "1 pill, twice a day". (I'm counting on
Russian equivalent folk doing the same, of course... /fingers
crossed/.)
The separation of typing duties from stenography was only possible
with the introduction of dictatorial equipment. History lesson,
finished. Thank you for listening. :)
But stenographers and typists do different job.
But stenographers and typists do different job.Did you mean to say they did different jobs (pl.)? I agree with
Paul's reply. Proof:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGb_jzaUWOg
(Candid camera: Woody Allen dictates a letter)
Well, I meant that it is possible that a typist is not
able to stenograph, ->
and vice versa. Quick typing and stenographing aretwo different skills.
Quick typing and stenographing are two different skills.
I also don't see any evidence indicating Annabel had been
employed in the same capacity, but IMHO also there is no
ground to suggest that a stenographer is as unique position
in a firm as its President.
|is in as unique a position
Maybe it is better to remove "position"?:
"...but, IMHO, also there is no ground to suggest that a
stenographer is as unique in a firm as its President."
The rule you cited mentions two important factors... the
uniqueness of the job & the formality of the job description.
In everyday life things may not be quite so simple. But as
long as you know rules have exceptions I can't think of a
better one. :-))
As one Murphy law says, "For every human problem, there is a
neat, simple solution; and it is always wrong." ;-)
here is no ground to suggest that a stenographer is asis in as unique a position
unique position in a firm as its President.
What do say to: "Stenographer is as uniqe a position in
firm as president."? What do say to: "Stenographer is
as uniqe a position in firm as president."?
Maybe it is better to remove "position"?:
"...but, IMHO, also there is no ground to suggest that a
stenographer is as unique in a firm as its President."
You're getting a little lost. The statement is one of fact.
In days long past there was a time of one-to-one direct
professional relationships between a senior executive (say,
president) and the organisation's (sole) stenographer.
A good stenographer is worth a dozen typists.
In days of old, I had a 24 year long career and knew of
only two stenographers at that workplace.
As my father might have said, they're "as scarce as hens' teeth"... especially nowadays. When I mentioned to one of our
daughter's young friends awhile ago that my mother was a stenographer
she didn't understand what I was referring to although she herself has a university degree.
Stenographers may have been done a disservice by the
common tendency to lump them together with anybody who can type, use a copying machine, and answer the phone. Years ago there were jokes about the "steno pool"... more likely a "typing pool" AFAIC. And I agree that recording devices may have changed the picture as well. ;-)
A good stenographer is worth a dozen typists.
Thankyou. My mother was a stenographer. Like the "secretary" at a
small school she had various other duties as well. But she told me
that when she was taking "business courses" she chose to learn
bookkeeping & shorthand, both of which were elective subjects,
while the majority of people apparently didn't believe they would
be successful or couldn't be bothered.
In days of old, I had a 24 year long career and knew of only two
stenographers at that workplace.
As my father might have said, they're "as scarce as hens' teeth"... especially nowadays. When I mentioned to one of our daughter's
young friends awhile ago that my mother was a stenographer she
didn't understand what I was referring to although she herself has
a university degree.
That was all so long ago. In the early 80s typists were being
phased out as fodder to provide 'balance' in pay increases deals
won by unions. Supervisors and clerical staff were expected to
produce their own formal output via automation (early computers),
while skilled staff were converted or 'let go'. Later, the clerks
became the fodder. I got on my own terms.
while skilled staff were converted or 'let go'. Later, the clerks
became the fodder. I got on my own terms.
Why "fodder"? Is it food for cattle?
Probably, stenographers disappeared after the dictaphone
had been invented.
(is "the" correct here?)
I wrote:
What do say to: "Stenographer is as uniqe a position in
firm as president."? What do say to: "Stenographer is
as uniqe a position in firm as president."?
Forgive me the typos:
What do *you* say to: "Stenographer is as *unique* a
position in *a* firm as president."?
now we have a young GP who uses a computer to generate
prescriptions in English. He doesn't waste a lot of time typing out polysyllabic names of medications &/or instructions such as "apply
to affected area(s) twice daily". I imagine that with the aid of
the computer he has found other ways of working quickly.
now we have a young GP who uses a computer to generate
prescriptions in English. He doesn't waste a lot of time
typing out polysyllabic names of medications &/or
instructions such as "apply to affected area(s) twice
daily". I imagine that with the aid of the computer he
has found other ways of working quickly.
The more we live the cooler it becomes. I even believe
that now the computer itself can type the speech which
you say to the microphone.
But stenographers and typists do different job.
A stenographer doesn't type his texts; they write
speeches down by hand using the special stenographic
symbols and tricks. The only problem is that nobody
can read their scripts. ;-)
Neither can I. That's why they -did- type from their
own notes!
Although the 'chicken scratchings' form that steno notes
may start by using a standard script, often the person
would insert their own symbology to account for in-house
terms and abbreviations, for example.
It's similar to the medical field where there is a
notation form for even the specification of patients'
medication. Ask a nurse, pharmacist or doctor (?maybe)
how their 'shorthand' looks for a typical example for:
"1 pill, twice a day".
(I'm counting on Russian equivalent folk doing the same,
of course... /fingers crossed/.)
The separation of typing duties from stenography was only
possible with the introduction of dictatorial equipment.
History lesson, finished. Thank you for listening. :)
As I get older I appreciate that my ancestors knew stuff I
wish I'd paid more attention to while they were still alive. If I
tend to ramble that may be at least in part because I've lost a few marbles. But I am also aware that I may be among the last few people
on earth who know such things, and it seems people who haven't already heard them often enjoy my stories... [grin].
| Sysop: | Nelgin |
|---|---|
| Location: | Plano, TX |
| Users: | 513 |
| Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
| Uptime: | 04:36:02 |
| Calls: | 8,286 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 15,517 |
| Messages: | 928,305 |