Personally, I’m a fan of neither faith nor secrets. I think I’d pass on any heaven that would have ‘Trust what you’re told and don’t ask too many questions’ as its most important lesson for mere mortals.
I think I’d pass on any heaven that would have... Does this mean I would pass it on? Or does it mean I would discount it?
Text from an article by Jesse Bering, who is a former academic in psychology whose writing has appeared in Scientific American, Slate and The Guardian, among others. His latest book is Perv: The Sexual Deviant in All of Us (2013).
Question commentary by me.
Question commentary by me.
6 comments:
Either one. But which one do you think?
The pronoun makes it easy because, when using phrasal verbs, the pronoun should always go between the verb and its supplement, a difference represented in the corresponding examples "turn on the light" and "turn it on".
Sure, you can say "turn the light on" but you can't say "turn on it" without changing the meaning.
This brings us back to the original question: "Pass it on" or "pass on it"?
Even without the pronoun version as an example, I think we know what the author means. Nevertheless, if you want to make it crystal, then perhaps "I think I'd *take a pass* on any heaven that does not allow my bed to make."
I'm all for crystal clear clarity, and I think, out of context, that sentence lacks it. Is clarity a modifiable noun or is it like unique or dead? Anything that makes my bed make or my stove cook wins in my book.
If by out of context you mean that "I think I'd pass on any...", I think you're right. But I still think the sentence in its entirety makes it clear the nature of the passing on, as it were if you will.
Here to wit and notwithstanding, not to mention bihaptically and in re and sub rosa, I guess I'll have to cede you at least a point in this difference of opinion. After all, you are the pro and I am a mere reader. To put it more graciously, yeah, you're probee right. I do think I know what he means.
Sorry. Mine was not to dispute the correctness of your point, i.e., not not to say that the point you point out does not point to something we would do well to try to avoid in our own writing; imprecision in explication, relatively (un)clear context((d)uality) or not.
I am an inadequately informed profession, thanks quite the same.
To clarify the previous comment: I was splitting hairs, - certainly almost, anyway - regarding being overly critical of others and, perhaps, in doing so, overly critical of your critical thinking myself - or maybe just not precise enough.
Post a Comment