Re: [doc] fix a potential grammer mistake - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Junwang Zhao
Subject Re: [doc] fix a potential grammer mistake
Date
Msg-id CAEG8a3L+5v=StnyPc1L2Q4onrNcD622YD-uKsSo-tn0hV6=YhQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [doc] fix a potential grammer mistake  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [doc] fix a potential grammer mistake
List pgsql-hackers
Attachment is a corrected version based on Tom's suggestion.

Thanks.

On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 9:56 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Erikjan Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl> writes:
> > I don't think these  "were"s  are wrong but arguably changing them to
> > "have" helps non-native speakers (like myself), as it doesn't change the
> > meaning significantly as far as I can see.
>
> I think it does --- it changes the meaning from passive to active.
> I don't necessarily object to rewriting these sentences more broadly,
> but I don't think "have issued" is the correct phrasing.
>
> Possibly "The user issued ..." would work.
>
>                         regards, tom lane



-- 
Regards
Junwang Zhao

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: pg15b2: large objects lost on upgrade
Next
From: Justin Pryzby
Date:
Subject: Re: A test for replay of regression tests