<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Making Sense of &#8220;Since&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:00:10 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mike</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/comment-page-1/#comment-75565</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:46:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/?p=1531#comment-75565</guid>
		<description>No, there shouldn&#039;t be any confusion here.  &quot;Since happier times&quot; could only mean BEFORE the death of Andie and Bruce&#039;s parents.  That is clearly implied by the first sentence.  Therefore, they’d had the dog before the parents died.  

The post should have dealt with the use of a better word here instead of pointing out a possible point of ambiguity when there really is none.  The use of the word &#039;since&#039; in the second instance is not ambiguous at all.  It becomes confusing only when someone begins to think it&#039;s confusing and starts making noise.  DailyWritingTips had better posts than this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, there shouldn&#8217;t be any confusion here.  &#8220;Since happier times&#8221; could only mean BEFORE the death of Andie and Bruce&#8217;s parents.  That is clearly implied by the first sentence.  Therefore, they’d had the dog before the parents died.  </p>
<p>The post should have dealt with the use of a better word here instead of pointing out a possible point of ambiguity when there really is none.  The use of the word &#8217;since&#8217; in the second instance is not ambiguous at all.  It becomes confusing only when someone begins to think it&#8217;s confusing and starts making noise.  DailyWritingTips had better posts than this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cassie Tuttle</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/comment-page-1/#comment-75139</link>
		<dc:creator>Cassie Tuttle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 04:42:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/?p=1531#comment-75139</guid>
		<description>The ambiguity of the second &quot;since&quot; hadn&#039;t occurred to me until you posed the question.  And now that I&#039;ve given it some thought, here&#039;s the problem I see:

The first &quot;since&quot; (&lt;i&gt;since the death of their parents&lt;/i&gt;) is clear, and establishes a time frame, i.e., the period after their parents died, which occurred on a specific date.  But the second &quot;since&quot; (&lt;i&gt;since happier times&lt;/i&gt;) is not defined; there is no point of reference for the second &quot;since&quot; in terms of date, year, or defining event.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ambiguity of the second &#8220;since&#8221; hadn&#8217;t occurred to me until you posed the question.  And now that I&#8217;ve given it some thought, here&#8217;s the problem I see:</p>
<p>The first &#8220;since&#8221; (<i>since the death of their parents</i>) is clear, and establishes a time frame, i.e., the period after their parents died, which occurred on a specific date.  But the second &#8220;since&#8221; (<i>since happier times</i>) is not defined; there is no point of reference for the second &#8220;since&#8221; in terms of date, year, or defining event.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maeve</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/comment-page-1/#comment-74257</link>
		<dc:creator>Maeve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/?p=1531#comment-74257</guid>
		<description>Perhaps the simplest fix would be to change the second &quot;since&quot; to &quot;in.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps the simplest fix would be to change the second &#8220;since&#8221; to &#8220;in.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grace S.</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/comment-page-1/#comment-74252</link>
		<dc:creator>Grace S.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:08:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/?p=1531#comment-74252</guid>
		<description>I think the confusion could be avoided (even if the reviewer wanted to use &quot;since&quot; twice in the paragraph) by the addition of a few words. In this case, it should read &quot;. . . Friday, who had been a member of their family since happier times . . .&quot;, which means something different from &quot;. . . Friday, who had become a member of their family since happier times . . .&quot; It&#039;s probably still better to reword one of the sentences altogether, however.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the confusion could be avoided (even if the reviewer wanted to use &#8220;since&#8221; twice in the paragraph) by the addition of a few words. In this case, it should read &#8220;. . . Friday, who had been a member of their family since happier times . . .&#8221;, which means something different from &#8220;. . . Friday, who had become a member of their family since happier times . . .&#8221; It&#8217;s probably still better to reword one of the sentences altogether, however.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mel</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/making-sense-of-since/comment-page-1/#comment-74051</link>
		<dc:creator>Mel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 04:07:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/?p=1531#comment-74051</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t get it.  Maybe that&#039;s because English is not my first language (nor my second).  My understanding is, as you&#039;ve put it, that &quot;they’d had the dog before the parents died&quot;.  For me, &quot;Since happier times&quot; could only mean &quot;when their parents were alive&quot;, same as what  Janeane White wrote.  I thought that was pretty much established in the first sentence.  Would you like to elucidate?  I&#039;m a fan of English and DWT, and I would very much like to master the language as much as I can in this lifetime.  So if I don&#039;t get the ambiguity, something&#039;s wrong. :(

But I am aware (and I understand) that using the same word in a paragraph is considered poor style, and the use of another word here would have sounded better.  Thanks and more power!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t get it.  Maybe that&#8217;s because English is not my first language (nor my second).  My understanding is, as you&#8217;ve put it, that &#8220;they’d had the dog before the parents died&#8221;.  For me, &#8220;Since happier times&#8221; could only mean &#8220;when their parents were alive&#8221;, same as what  Janeane White wrote.  I thought that was pretty much established in the first sentence.  Would you like to elucidate?  I&#8217;m a fan of English and DWT, and I would very much like to master the language as much as I can in this lifetime.  So if I don&#8217;t get the ambiguity, something&#8217;s wrong. <img src='http://www.dailywritingtips.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>But I am aware (and I understand) that using the same word in a paragraph is considered poor style, and the use of another word here would have sounded better.  Thanks and more power!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
