I agree, but it is a confusing writing style. Removing "who" makes everything much clearer.

I've done a bit of transcription and it seems more suited to that.



"When we were discussing the policies, specifically in Europe, they seemed to be detrimental to employment rates" etc etc



Academics speak like this all the time, adding little bits and clarifying things. I think most people just use brackets instead.



You can make good money if you have excellent grammar, most people don't give a **** and just have the basics down.

Semi OT but seemed like a good thread to ask. I'm writing this piece and I've been arguing with my editor about whether the average reader knows what a Mexican standoff means or not. I worked it into the story in relation to a real-life situation that it describes perfectly, and I'd love to be able to keep it there, but my editor is convinced that people are just gonna be like wtf does this mean. So, without googling or anything, do you think the vast majority of people would roughly get the meaning or not? I basically thought it's a super well-known concept but apparently not.

I think it's common enough to use and that most readers will know what it means. The average nonreader might not, but they wouldn't exactly be your target audience. Extra bonus as well for introducing a fairly common term to your readers who don't know.

One was referenced by name in the hugely popular Inglorious Bastards. I think anyone older than 20 should get it.

Sent from my HUAWEI G700-U20 using Tapatalk

Thanks guys, that's how I felt as well. The piece is mainly directed at pop culture-savvy males, who I also think should be more likely to know the term than your average person. So screw it, I'm gonna keep it and hope it works out.

Unless you're talking about a plot device in cinema, why not just write "standoff"?

Nowhere in that link is the phrase limited to movies.

I didn't say it was.

No way José will let you use it.

In these enlightened, politcally correct times, the use of "Mexican standoff" is an obvious racist trigger.

How long until you Finnish the book?

Because Mexican standoff and standoff are two very different things? I can't really copy-paste the whole thing I wrote here, but I'm basically describing a tension-filled situation between two parties I get caught in the middle of, where neither side seems to want to make the first move.

"Once compliments have been exchanged, each side is sitting in silence, waiting for someone to fire the first shot. No one's opening his mouth, and I wonder what this is about. I feel like I'm caught in the middle of a Mexican standoff."

Lucky me I'm from Finland and not participating in any of the Mexico/USA racist bs so I plan to get a pass Book is Finnished, just doing the final polishingaments where we second-guess every little thing such as whether "Mexican standoff" is a widely enough known term or not.

The Kia commercial with bo Jackson playing tecmo bowl ends with the words mvp of suv's across the screen.

Marshalls


Lowe's

The calendar could be fine.

Yeah however the font size of the the thing the Watcher has makes me doubtful.

Regardless, it's a victim of poor print design.

I didn't pick up on that, but you're correct.
I was too busy sighing to continue reading beyond the apostrophe.

I'm going to hijack this to ask for help/opinions again because you guys are awesome

How do you guys go about spelling "high stakes"/"low stakes" poker, do you use a hyphen or not? Does it depend on the context? Is there a definitive answer to when (if ever) you need to use a hyphen?

(For clarity: I mean high-stakes / high stakes etc)

I don't think it's ever wrong to hyphenate a compound adjective (when it comes before a noun), so if in doubt, do it. It's only mandatory in situations that might be confusing (for instance "a small business executive" is ambiguous, "a small-business executive" is not). "High stakes poker" and "high-stakes poker" are both OK imo.

Note that you should not hyphenate a compound adjective that doesn't come before a noun, so for instance "The poker we played was low-stakes" is wrong.

Yeah that makes sense, I've been hyphenating these for the most part, but sometimes it sounds a bit silly to my ear. But I think it's mainly just because I'm used to reading it without hyphens (the High Stakes Poker TV show, 2p2 High Stakes NL forum, etc etc).

Thanks!

A small business-executive?

The ambiguous part without the hyphen is that the business executive could be physically small. But you are probably just being sarcastic and know this.

I would punctuate it: A small, business executive.

This would effectively describe the executive as small and business.

Thank God for hyphens, I always say.

I just thought it was somewhat of an odd choice for an example. If the man was actually small we could probably determine that from the context. The point stands, though (obv).

An interesting piece -- about how we use English without understanding a lot of its rules:

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/201....link.facebook