Quoting Holger Levsen (2014-05-03 15:26:37) > On Samstag, 3. Mai 2014, Ben Finney wrote: >>> care to explain the difference? >> We're not interested in what form a *modification* takes (if it even >> makes sense to talk about a “form of modification”, which doesn't >> seem coherent in the context). We're interested in what form of the >> *work* is the source form. >> >> That is, to answer the question “what is the source form of the >> work”, we need a definition that answers in terms of “such-and-so >> form of the work”. >> >> To answer that question, an answer that talks about “form of >> modification” doesn't line up; at least, I can't make it coherent >> without changing the wording. > > thanks for the explaination, even though I cannot make much sense out > of it ;) > > I appreciate there seems to be a huge difference for native english > speakers, but to me, “preferred form of modification” equals "he > preferred form of the work for making modifications to it".
"form of modification": How it is modified. "form for modification": That which is modified. We care about form of source, not form of modification [to source]. > And since it's shorter and appearantly many other people don't seem to > get the difference, "preferred form of modification” in my book has > become a standing expression, which most people seem to get righ. Replace "of" with "for" and it is (not identical to other texts arguably perfected via lawyers, but) correct english. I sure hope it is not a single character that feels too heavy ;-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
