Reading the following articles on The New York Times, I observe that the journalists use the phrase "On one hand" through their pieces.
Just after having read in those article that phrase, I expected to find afterwards its counterpart counterpoint "On the other hand". But neither I found.
So, the question is: Is it okay English or good English style to use in a piece "On one hand" without using subsequently its counterpart counterpoint "On the other hand" in the same piece.
Could the lack of "On the other hand", after having read "One one hand", confuse the English reader?
Answer
“Could the lack of "On the other hand" after having read "One one hand" confuse the English reader?”
Starting out with “On one hand” and failing to later offer an alternative via “on the other hand” is evidence of bad writing and sloppy work by the authors and editors of those articles. However, I suspect that many readers don't notice the missing alternative; apparently even the authors and editors didn't notice the problem.
If the missing alternative isn't noticed – that is, if the introductory phrase “On one hand” drops from view as so many noise words do – then the reader doesn't get confused. But a more-careful reader may have problems!
No comments:
Post a Comment