Re: [Geiser-users] Corrections for Geiser/doc/parens.texi

[Mark Harig]

> > --- Texinfo source:
> >
> > @cindex switching schemes
> > If for some reason you're not happy with the Scheme implementation 
that
> > Geiser has assigned to your file, you can change it with @kbd{C-c 
C-s},
> > and probably take a look at @address@hidden,,the 
previous
> > subsection}, the previous subsection} to make sure that Geiser 
doesn't
> > get confused again.
> >
> > Correction:
> >
> > 1) The anchor that this paragraph's reference refers to appears to 
be
> >   the same section that the reader has just read, that is,
> >   `switching-repl-buff'.  Another anchor is needed near the 
beginning
> >   of the subsubheading "How Geiser associates a REPL...," so that 
the
> >   cross-reference can refer to it instead, correct?
> >
> > 2) The clause that began with "...and probably take a look..." does
> >   not have a subject: "...and you should probably take a look..."
>
> I'm not sure about this: the sentence takes the form "You can do A and
> probably B", which elides the subject it its second clause and sounds
> correct to me: isn't that the case? Or perhaps you think the wording 
is
> not clear enough?

"You can do A, and probably do B."

"You can do A, and probably should do B."

"You can do A, and you probably should do B."

The first construction, above, says that the subject may do A, but only
might be able to do B, correct?  That is, it is saying something that is
not intended -- that the subject can (only) probably do B, but he might
not be able to do B.

The second construction is, I think, more what is intended.  The third
construction is my preference because the 'and' clause is in fact a
sub-clause, not part of a compound 'and', correct?

-