>Why, you can even as a fellow named GLENN MORTON, who has himself used the
>ellipsis in his own messages in the past! Let's see, on June 11, 1995, Morton
>quoted Johnson in DOT thus:
Yes, Jim I have occasionally been known to use ellipses. But I would highly
recommend to anyone that when an author uses them, even me, check on them.
There is lots of danger in ellipses. In Hugh's quotation, He does get it all
wrong and actually leaves the wrong impression. The real quote from Tattersall
is:
"'If these dates are accurate,they offer remarkably early evidence of modern
human behavior.' says Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural
History." B. Bower, "Human Origins Recede in Australia" Science News Sept. 28,
1996 p. 196
The full Hugh Ross quote is:
"[The Australian discovery] offers remarkably early evidence of
modern human behavior...if these new dates are accurate." Hugh Ross, "The
Meaning of Art and Music", Facts & Faith 10:4, 4th qtr 1996, p. 6
As I said above, I hate ellipses and even when I use them people should check
on me. Here Hugh reversed the word order. The ellipsis part actually came
earlier and Tattersall is not reported to have enven used the term "new" to
describe the dates.
Is Hugh's quote accurate? Yes and no. The essence was captured but the actual
words were mangled. It is accurate in the same sense that I could now quote
Tattersall as saying "Assuming the dating method to have given the correct
answer, the discoveries show amazing indications of actions typical of us
today."
I caught the essence of Tattersall's meaning but he didn't say what I just
quoted him as saying. In fact I didn't use a single word that Tattersall did.
>JB<<Glenn! What brew are you sipping out there?
>
>GM <<Its my Grandmothers Home Remedy. (TM) :-)
>
>Was she ever caught by the Feds?
5-10 in Leavenworth.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm