[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Laura Lazzati]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1 bytes --]



[-- Attachment #2: 0001-doc-Fix-typo.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 978 bytes --]

From c95388bb20d7f57b5e9fd6b391a8a9ca2b365955 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Laura Lazzati <laura.lazzati.15@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 16:11:26 -0300
Subject: [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

 * doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix system): Fix typo.
---
 doc/guix.texi | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/doc/guix.texi b/doc/guix.texi
index c138d4324..03c810cf1 100644
--- a/doc/guix.texi
+++ b/doc/guix.texi
@@ -22312,7 +22312,7 @@ switch to it@footnote{This action (and the related actions
 @code{switch-generation} and @code{roll-back}) are usable only on
 systems already running GuixSD.}.
 
-This effects all the configuration specified in @var{file}: user
+This affects all the configuration specified in @var{file}: user
 accounts, system services, global package list, setuid programs, etc.
 The command starts system services specified in @var{file} that are not
 currently running; if a service is currently running this command will
-- 
2.17.1

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 390 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 04:17:33PM -0300, Laura Lazzati wrote:
> 

> From c95388bb20d7f57b5e9fd6b391a8a9ca2b365955 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Laura Lazzati <laura.lazzati.15@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2018 16:11:26 -0300
> Subject: [PATCH] doc: Fix typo
> 
>  * doc/guix.texi (Invoking guix system): Fix typo.

Thanks! Pushed as 214e55fa87e636bf686ab8b64e9811870e61d22a

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 641 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:37:57PM +0100, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice wrote:
> This concerns ‘guix system reconfigure’, which does indeed *effect* the
> configuration file and can never *affect* it.
> 
> I think the patch should be reverted.

Oh, you're right — I didn't read the text closely so I missed the
context. And of course, nothing affects the configuration except for
people.

Reverted with commit e51c91aba62f3da3b51e5da3cc774a652e721855

This sense of 'effect' is relatively rare, so I'm not surprised we made
this mistake :)

I'd bet that most people who learned English as their first language do
not know it.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Laura Lazzati]

 a Funny fact about me is that when I studied English, for my last
Cambridge exam - sat for it being a teenager - I had to  be consistent
with the accent I had to choose. And I chose the British one. So even
nowadays my English is not that good, I tend to write centre, add the
u (behaviour)  add the r speaking : "the idea of", "pain in the neck'
... And I checked the word both in Cambridge dictionary and found it
as a noun, then in Oxford dictionary of collocations and the same.
Then I realized about it and only found it as a verb in American
English . Maybe that is why I thought it was a typo. Anyone whose
mother tongue is English can shed some light? Thanks for reverting :)
Regards!
Laura

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Leo Famulari]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1543 bytes --]

On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:56:12PM -0300, Laura Lazzati wrote:
> Then I realized about it and only found it as a verb in American
> English . Maybe that is why I thought it was a typo. Anyone whose
> mother tongue is English can shed some light? Thanks for reverting :)

The definition of 'effect' as a verb in the English wiktionary [0] is
simple: "To make or bring about; to implement."

In my opinion, using 'effect' in this way demonstrates a very high level
of fluency, even for native English speakers.

You would not use it unless you knew that your audience was highly
educated or 'well-read' in English.

You only use 'effect' as a verb when you 'make or bring about' something
that is abstract or intangible. You do not 'effect' a house or a bowl of
soup; you make, create, or build them.

Merriam-Webster [1] includes a definition which helps us understand the
usage in the Guix manual: "to put into operation".

Remember, the manual says, "This effects all the configuration specified
in config.scm: user accounts, system services, et cetera".

If you change that sentence to use the Merriam-Webster definition, I
think the meaning is clear:

"This puts into operation all the configuration specified in config.scm ..."

[0]
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/effect#Verb

[1] 
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/effect

And some extra reading, another good explanation. I agree with them that
this usage is "not common, but acceptable in rare cases."
https://web.ku.edu/~edit/affect.html

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[bug#33632] [PATCH] doc: Fix typo

[Laura Lazzati]

Thanks for taking time to explain this :) Now I have`more dictionaries
to take into account ;)

I also read this: so that was why I found it confusing too:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/affect-or-effect

Regards!
Laura

On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 3:48 PM Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:56:12PM -0300, Laura Lazzati wrote:
> > Then I realized about it and only found it as a verb in American
> > English . Maybe that is why I thought it was a typo. Anyone whose
> > mother tongue is English can shed some light? Thanks for reverting :)
>
> The definition of 'effect' as a verb in the English wiktionary [0] is
> simple: "To make or bring about; to implement."
>
> In my opinion, using 'effect' in this way demonstrates a very high level
> of fluency, even for native English speakers.
>
> You would not use it unless you knew that your audience was highly
> educated or 'well-read' in English.
>
> You only use 'effect' as a verb when you 'make or bring about' something
> that is abstract or intangible. You do not 'effect' a house or a bowl of
> soup; you make, create, or build them.
>
> Merriam-Webster [1] includes a definition which helps us understand the
> usage in the Guix manual: "to put into operation".
>
> Remember, the manual says, "This effects all the configuration specified
> in config.scm: user accounts, system services, et cetera".
>
> If you change that sentence to use the Merriam-Webster definition, I
> think the meaning is clear:
>
> "This puts into operation all the configuration specified in config.scm ..."
>
> [0]
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/effect#Verb
>
> [1]
> https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/effect
>
> And some extra reading, another good explanation. I agree with them that
> this usage is "not common, but acceptable in rare cases."
> https://web.ku.edu/~edit/affect.html