RE: [External] : Re: master 4c0c9d23ab 1/2: Rewrite the minibuffer lazy highlight feature

[Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>]

> > "You can do XYZ."
> > "ABC lets you do XYZ."
> 
> There is semantic sloppiness in using "lets" to mean "enables".
> Likewise, using "permits" or "allows" is sloppy.  They all refer to
> giving permission for or authorizing an action.

Sorry, I don't agree with your characterization.
But of course the devil is in the details of any
particular use/occurrence.

"Let" and "enable...to" are similar.  Neither is
inherently "sloppy" semantically.  But anything
can be used in a way that makes its meaning less
than crystal clear.

Neither "let" nor "enable" _necessarily_ involves
permission or authorization.

(Of course, as with connotation generally, a word
always carries with it _all_ of its connotations.
But context typically filters them.)

"Let" and "enable" _can_ each involve permission.
And it's true that "let" is used with that sense
more than "enable" is - much more.

If a given context makes it difficult to know
whether the meaning might involve permission,
then using "enable...to" might make clear that
permission is not involved.

"Let" is generally preferable for the contexts
we're talking about, however, because it's
simpler.  "Enables...to" is less succinct, and
it's more formal - often unnecessarily so, for
user documentation.

That's the main difference in this context.
"Let" is more conversational and more easily
understood by more people, including non-native
readers.

But of course, if a particular use of "let" can
easily be misread, then...don't use it that way.

("Let" also encourages use of the active voice -
it's nearly impossible to use it in the passive
voice.  Not so, "enable".)

> For actively making something possible, "enable"
> is the clear word.

"Enable" is clear for that, I agree.  But so is
"let" in most cases.  Here's a rule of thumb, to
mull over in any particular context:

 IF using "enable...to" isn't clearer than using
    "let" - i.e., you gain nothing in particular
    by using "enable...to" -
 THEN use "let".

IOW, use "let" by default, rereading to make sure
the meaning is clear and not ambiguous.

Also: It's often the case that it's better to say
"You can use X to do Y" than to say either "X
lets you do Y" or "X enables you to do Y".  That's
why I put that first - see the quoted text at the
top of this message.

(And yes, "can", not "may", for the same reason
you raised: less ambiguity wrt whether permission
is involved.) 

("Enable" of course also makes sense, and "let"
does not, when talking about some feature being
enabled: "You need to enable X before you can Y."
That's a different sense from "enable AN_ACTOR to
ACT".)

Examples:

XYZ lets you quickly react to changing requirements

XYZ lets you create and store collections without
needing to know...

XYZ lets you discover information about the
structure and content of...

Function ABC lets you modify XYZ data in a
declarative way.

Condition ABC lets you use a path expression to
select XYZ based on...

XYZ lets you append new elements to an existing
ABC, by specifying...

Using an array wrapper lets you...

Filters let you test for the existence of...
___

https://english.stackexchange.com/q/212345/51214

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/181533/word-for-allows-in-special-context

https://hinative.com/en-US/questions/1068322