Use of the word "very"

[GoDeacs]

I freaking hate "respectively." It's almost as bad as using "following" instead of "after." Never, ever will respectively get past me and into the paper. We have one writer who insists on using it, even though s/he should know by now that it's not going to happen. Ever. Stubborn, I guess.

Then again, I know I'm pretty darn stubborn, too.

 

[Boobie Miles]

It works with many elements that you have to tie together: The most boring teams in the NFL are Indianapolis and Seattle, which lead the AFC South and NFC West, respectively.
And even that's a clunker of a sentence.

I stubbornly maintain you don't need it there, either. If you match the order of the elements, people will get it.

Using it also presumes that most fans won't know that Indy is in the South and Seattle is in the West, and most do.

I don't think you can presume what most fans know. And what if you were writing about St. Louis and Dallas. Would all fans automatically know St. Louis is in the West and Dallas is in the East?

I'm not as opposed to respectively as some are, but at the very least I don't think you're system works of just matching the order of the elements.

 

[playthrough]

I really have enjoyed this thread very much. It's a new personal record for grammar-related reading for me.

 

[jlee]

I'm with SF that "respectively" shouldn't be anywhere in copy, but it isn't extraneous in the cases stated above.
"Jones and Smith ran for six and eight touchdowns" means each player ran for six and eight touchdowns.

They should still be rephrased.

Also, I don't think we can assume fans know that Indy is in the South division. I think more fans own maps than know the breakdown of the AFC.

 

[bigpern23]

The one that kills me is "would." It started as a TV thing, but it seems to be seeping into the print world as well.

"Jones broke off a 50-yard run and would go on to rush for 210 in the game."

No, you uncleforker. He broke off a 50-yard run and rushed for 210. Why use four words when you can use one?

Oh, how I hate the use of "would."

 

[trifectarich]

Would I say it's a word to be avoided at all costs? No, but in many instances, probably so.

Same with "that."

 

[Trouser_Buddah]

Jay Mariotti. That would be two useless words.

Basically, I'm very late to the game at this respective hour, but that made me laugh...

 

[SixToe]

"uncleforker"

Awesome.

 

[Diabeetus]

Would I say it's a word to be avoided at all costs? No, but in many instances, probably so.

Same with "that."

Getting rid of "that" is one of my favorite hobbies.

 

[Ace]

I also think works such as "just" and "only" are overused.

He rushed for just 10 yards on 15 carries. If you want to editorialize fine -- do it better.

He threw only one interception all season. Same thing. Instead of "only" tell me if he set a record or led the league or be descriptive.

 

[Tom Petty]

I also think works such as "just" and "only" are overused.

He rushed for just 10 yards on 15 carries. If you want to editorialize fine -- do it better.

He threw only one interception all season. Same thing. Instead of "only" tell me if he set a record or led the league or be descriptive.

what if he only set one record?

 

[Ace]

I also think works such as "just" and "only" are overused.

He rushed for just 10 yards on 15 carries. If you want to editorialize fine -- do it better.

He threw only one interception all season. Same thing. Instead of "only" tell me if he set a record or led the league or be descriptive.

what if he only set one record?

that's when you go with "just."