Re: Paul Lockhart's book reviewed in the L.A. Times!

From: Rin Watt <katecwatt_at_gmail.com_at_hypermail.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:26:20 -0000

I would argue that a semicolon is the best way of indicating a causal or other intimate relationship between two sentences; therefore, I would not use a colon in the manner you describe. Colons, for me, only set up lists or flatly obvious examples: catalogs, details, not concepts.

Surely the fact that what follows a colon needn't be a complete sentence suggests how paltry a linkage it provides? A semicolon, on the other hand, by insisting on completeness on both sides, is by definition more interested in both balance and complexity.



Rin



Joy McCann <joy.mccann_at_...> wrote:
>
I do not agree that a colon merely sets up a list: sometimes, it links two clauses, with the implication that the two thoughts harmonize with each other, and/or are equivalent in some respect.
>
> --J
>
Received on 2009-04-27 06:27:14