ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

I've decided to switch from a Jan 27, 1997 format to a 27 Jan 1997 format for dates because eliminating the extra comma helps the readability of some of my nastier sentences.

Here it is: "Although there are many different types of HLA proteins, each person has only a small, relatively unique set that is inherited from their parents."

Thanks much. And, uh, I'm on deadline, so hurry up!

Although there are many different types of HLA proteins, individuals inherit from their parents only a small and relatively unique subset.

etc.

"Although many different types of HLA proteins exist, each person inherits only a small, realtively unique set."

.. not sure if that meaning is accurate or not. You may want to clarify the sentence in that .. is only the inherited set small, or is the total set small?

You don't have to be a grammar/usage nazi to object to torture in all its forms, including wrt the language.

Also, I want to kill the person who prompted Andrew's initial post.

So, any thoughts on "relatively unique?" Oh shit I'm an idiot, I just realized that is a great pun! Maybe I should keep it, then.

I was hoping to just get rid of the whole "unique" problem and go with something that means what Dan said, but not using that irksome word. Old-school is to insist that there are no degrees of unique; either it is or it isn't, period.

HUMAN LEUKOCYTE ANTIGEN: also known as major histocompatibility complex (MHC). These proteins are found on the outside of almost every cell in the body and play an important part in controlling the immune system. Although there are many different types of HLA proteins, each person has only a small, relatively unique set that is inherited from their parents. Some HLA types are associated either a faster or slower progression of HIV disease. The type of HLA proteins a person has is also important in identifying good "matches" for tissue grafts and organ transplants.

So yeah, ya'll can go to town on the rest of it, too (if you like!).

Do I have the world's coolest job or what?

I'm kind of sucking as a med writer right now. I'm better as an editor, I think.

"their" is a perfectly acceptable form of non-gender third-person-singular possessive: i have the might of the oxford dictionary on my side. (er, i think.) god damn, it's a living language: let it evolve.

right, back to ILM. it's safer there.

Don't go back to ILM, stay here!!!

?

There are many different types of HLA proteins, but each person inherits only a small and essentially distinct set.

is how I'd do it. "exist" is a waste of a verb, because everything exists. (i know this isn't in yr orig. sentence, this was a suggestion.) "different" is superfluous, because you've already got "many types" - i assume these many types are not "the same"!!! "unique" cannot be modified by degree. "that is" is unnecessary.

also in radio you are never allowed to start a sentence with "although" because people will have their brains too full to quite follow the next bit, the bit that you actually are supposedly more concerned with anyway

HUMAN LEUKOCYTE ANTIGEN: also known as major histocompatibility complex (MHC). These proteins are found on the outside of almost every cell in the body and play an important part in controlling the immune system. Although there are many types of HLA proteins, each person has only a small set inherited from his or her parents. Some HLA types are associated with either a faster or slower progression of HIV disease. The type of HLA proteins a person has is also important in identifying good "matches" for tissue grafts and organ transplants.

Thank you all for helping me out--for whatever reason this particular definition (and especially that second sentence) was giving me fits. So now one last question--do you think that definition would be helpful if you were just an average joe and came across this weird term "HLA" when reading something about HIV/AIDS?

I know I should have a real focus group for this stuff, but time and money do not permit.

And I have no particular issue with letting language evolve, but a singular "their" is a really painful direction to let it go, if only because there will be terrible stand-up comedians in 2060 doing stupid Gallagher "English doesn't make sense" routines about how a single person pays "their" rent. I actually prefer "his or her" -- easier to read that as a workable unit than to temporarily suspend all rules of singular/plural agreement for just one case. In informal writing, it's easier to blow by, but in anything that strikes a formal tone it completely broadsides me. (Especially when it's so so easy to construct a sentence that avoids the issue entirely.)

The Tracer version is a big improvement, but although 'relatively unique' has to go, there is some sort of meaning there that is now gone. It's hard to find a better term there. I'd probably go with 'distinctive', but I'm not that happy with it.

I can't assess the definition very well - I read a fair bit of science, and have read a reasonable amount about proteins and so on. It seems very clear, I think.

The stand-up comic would have a better time with something like "A man jerks off their own penis", which is a construction not unlike one I've found myself using before, and which I eventually realized I have no problem with whatsoever.

Chris, I would say that the use of 'their' implies a lack of knowledge of the sex of the person(s) being discussed, which is untrue, so I do think it is bad.

Days after I took my current job, I was offered another writing clear English summaries of new scientific patents. I should have mentioned that earlier - it almost makes me a professional at this stuff!

gypsy get ready to laugh becuse that's the kind of thread this is!

xpost

I admit that English doesn't offer a good solution to the genderless singular third-person pronoun ("one" is pretentious and affected in English in a way that "on" isn't in French). But of the not-good solutions, I don't think "their" is the best. I usually try to write around it, or go with some kind of his/her construction.

Whereas I think it implies that the person in question is not specific. Using "their" underscores that we are not talking about some man in partiuclar. ("Bob Jones jerks off their own penis" would be weird.)

I mean, either "their" or "his" is fine there, I'd argue. But I don't think that "their" is at all "wrong", and it's something that I, as a native speaker, have produced on numerous occasions.

please tell me it was a copyeditors' convention! i know there's an argument here about adjectival phrasing, but really: it's a facile one usually propounded by people on the losing side in "sense v typography" arguments.

still, heheheh, a convention of subs. jesus christ, what a depressing thought. i love my job dearly, but ... the idea of that makes me want to hang myself from the nearest misrelated participle.