From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Sat May 01 2004 - 11:41:08 CDT
Nick Boalch wrote:
> I can't believe we're still arguing about this.
>
> Bruce and John are obviously still unhappy with Charles's proposed text;
> I've tried to take their comments on board to create another version as
> follows:
[...]
> Better?
Since you have not addressed any of the substantive issues, no.
It is absolutely mind-boggling that you state that you have
"tried to take their comments on board" when your proposed text
is littered with the term "back-reference", which both John and
I have pointed out is meaningless in the context of readers and
reading agents (i.e. as you have used it).