inspirational sentence.

BradCarsten · Mar 7, 2012

Hows this for a whopper of a sentence:

"Labour broker" means any natural person who conducts or carries on any business whereby such person for reward provides a client of such business with other persons to render a service or perform work for such client, or procures such other persons for the client, for which services or work such other persons are remunerated by such person.

Came across this nugget earlier and had to pass it on.
Its fine, add to my rep points if you must thank me. But seriously, wouldn't novels be so much easier to write if we marketed them towards academics? You could write whatever you wanted and they'd understand it.

The son of such a person who does love one of many others for without such person as the son would he be free to pursue that very one for which he has chosen, would limit the choice by his own wants.

In other words- The son's holding the ol' man back.

RobJ · Mar 7, 2012

I need to go lie down.

Buffysquirrel · Mar 7, 2012

Looks like someone trying to be a lawyer to me.

Hip-Hop-a-potamus · Mar 7, 2012

Reminds me of the scene in A Night at the Opera when Groucho and Chico are going through the contract together.

"The party of the first part, who in this contract shall be called the party of the first part..."

"I no like it."

"Okay, we'll get rid of it."

{{{{{rip}}}}

"The party of the second part, who in this contract shall be called the party of the second part..."

jaksen · Mar 7, 2012

I don't see what's wrong with that sentence at all.

After I read it 11-12 times it began to make sense.

seun · Mar 7, 2012

I'd rather eat my own eyes than try to read that again.

Schilcote · Mar 7, 2012

Buffallo buffallo buffallo buffallo Buffallo buffallo buffallo.

RichardGarfinkle · Mar 7, 2012

Academics do not understand everything automatically. They're using a different standard of writing from fiction writing. In general, academic writing is aimed at precision of usage in the field of academia.

My background is in math and computers. I had to do a great deal of work when I started writing fiction to make my stories not read like mathematical proofs.

A couple of years ago I collaborated with my brother (a physicist) on a science popularization. It takes a fair amount of work to conjoin the carefulness of academic terminology with the evocativeness of popular writing. Not because the latter is better than the former, but because it serves a different purpose and is directed toward a different audience.

Jamesaritchie · Mar 7, 2012

I've had lawyers put sentences into contracts that were far more complicated, and far more difficult to understand, than this one. Other than a couple of missing commas, this one is, at least, understandable.

But a novel full of such sentences would make my eyes bleed, which means it would probably be healed by critics, and win a Pulitzer. Maybe even a Nobel. I can't say this sentence is any worse than many I found in Ulysses, and it was voted best novel of the twentieth century.

BradCarsten · Mar 7, 2012

jaksen said:
I don't see what's wrong with that sentence at all.

After I read it 11-12 times it began to make sense.

stare at anything long enough and you're bound to see patterns emerging. :tongue

Jamesaritchie said:
But a novel full of such sentences would make my eyes bleed, which means it would probably be healed by critics, and win a Pulitzer. Maybe even a Nobel.

randi.lee · Mar 7, 2012

I think some people spend way too much time saying the same thing. But hey- the quote works for some folks...

ChaosTitan · Mar 7, 2012

seun said:
I'd rather eat my own eyes than try to read that again.

Me too.

Susan Coffin · Mar 7, 2012

I work in a law office and am used to reading such long, poorly punctuated, sentences. Thank goodness, our standard is to write clear and well-punctuated legal jargon.

Trevor Bruhn · Mar 7, 2012

Among my sins in a much earlier part of life was a stint of legislative drafting. The whole object there is to keep boiling a sentence until all the ambiguity has been rendered out. (This does not, unfortunately, reduce the volume of the object at all; rather, the converse applies!) Ambiguous statues or regulations allow people who would rather avoid them an opportunity to do so by employing professional ambiguity-exploiters. This profession is typically denoted by the initials J.D. (here in the U.S. anyway) after the surname.
As a previous poster noted, legal writing can be clear and well-punctuated; even on rare occasions sparkling. This is most often found in briefs: arguments intended to persuade judges or their law clerks whose eyeballs start suffering as imagined by other posters here after many hours of reading in this genre. A good brief tries to stand out from the dreck by dint of polishing as thorough as many of you try to do with your fiction.
Cheers, Trevor

Grunkins · Mar 7, 2012

I feel like I just went mogul skiing.

dangerousbill · Mar 7, 2012

ave said:
But seriously, wouldn't novels be so much easier to write if we marketed them towards academics? You could write whatever you wanted and they'd understand it.

Who says academics understand it?

I spent my 45+ year career in chemistry research either writing such crap, or attempting to read it. But if I dared follow the blandishments of an editor to "write simple, write active, and don't be afraid to say 'I'", the external reviewers tore me apart.

You write academic in order to sound erudite. You don't expect to be read. Woe betide those who try.

Once in a while, I got an opportunity to write popular articles or interpretations. While it was a relief, it was also difficult to break the constipated academic tone. That took a few years after I retired.

Titan Orion · Mar 7, 2012

Whoever wrote that is a literary terrorist. I mean come on, labour workers arent all natural people, an whoeva dont know that dont know NUTHIN

IDGS · Mar 7, 2012

I feel dizzy.

If you need me, I'll be dreaming of viciously murdering people who write like this.

Viciously.

resulka · Mar 7, 2012

Schilcote said:
Buffallo buffallo buffallo buffallo Buffallo buffallo buffallo.

This hurt my brain worse than the lawyer-speak.

Seems to me that someone needs to eradicate the language of lawyers. In addition to boiling out all the ambiguity, it also makes it so lesser humans don't understand things they sign up for.

seun · Mar 8, 2012

seun said:
I'd rather eat my own eyes than try to read that again.

ChaosTitan said:
Me too.

Hey, eat your own eyes.

Ba dum tish.

Susan Coffin · Mar 8, 2012

Legal jargon really is not that difficult to understand, especially if it's written well. I believe the OP's example is meant to confuse the reader.

Sounds to me like a labor broker might hire workers on a subcontract and/or independent contractor basis, and probably so they don't have to pay employment taxes and can pay low wages.

Modog814 · Mar 8, 2012

Buffysquirrel said:
Looks like someone trying to be a lawyer to me.

Or trying to meet a word quota.

Niiicola · Mar 8, 2012

Looks like the stuff I edit at my day job. Sigh.

anguswalker · Mar 9, 2012

I think it's truly fascinating. "Any natural person" really got me thinking. As opposed to an unnatural person, is that? In which case, what do you call an unnatural person who conducts or carries on any business? Other than "Rupert Murdoch" that is.

ChaosTitan · Mar 9, 2012

seun said:
Hey, eat your own eyes.

Ba dum tish.

But yours are way tastier.....

inspirational sentence.

practical experience, FTW

My rhymes are bottomless

Caped Codder

Horror Man

Second Edition and Second Laughter

practical experience, FTW

Certified Non-Genius

Around

Tell it like it Is

Grand adventurer of the couch

Retired Illuminatus

Demigod of Order

@LeaveItToIan

What does it take?

Horror Man

Tell it like it Is

Twitchy

Around