Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=281912
I'm not sure what do here. One the one hand, I want to honor your request re not responding that you should work harder. On the other hand, you are going to summer at a V20, where excellence (and the hard work required to maintain that excellence) is required.Anonymous User wrote:How low do 2L/3L grades have to be to not receive a full time offer after the summer at a V20?
Please no responses about how i should start working harder.
Nah, just be sure to go into corporate where bros like me don't even know what an infinitive is.SmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.SmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
FWIW, this is a dying ruleSmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
Never should have been a rule; it's something English grammarians decided we ought not do in English because it can't be done in Latin (because Latin infinitives are just inflected words). To ham-fistedly shoehorn rules from other languages into one's own is to needlessly waste time and energy.runinthefront wrote:FWIW, this is a dying ruleSmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.cavalier1138 wrote:I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.SmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
albanach wrote: *you're
That's the silliest thing I've read this week.albanach wrote: So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether your in corporate or litigation.
albanach wrote:Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.cavalier1138 wrote:I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.SmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
http://www.adamsdrafting.com/to-not-or-not-to/
So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether your in corporate or litigation.
Interesting use of anonymous to protect your emoji.Anonymous User wrote:
albanach wrote:Have all the new partners you want. If clients ask lawyers not to split infinitives, lawyers will continue to abide by the commonly accepted rules. Ken Adams has covered this very topic - to not/ not to - on his blog and his only reason to prefer the unsplit infinitive is to avoid pissing off those that care which, after all, is determinate when you decide to work in a service industry.cavalier1138 wrote:I can't wait until a new generation of partners are in, so that ridiculous "rule" can finally disappear.SmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.
http://www.adamsdrafting.com/to-not-or-not-to/
So, if you want to make partner it might be best not to split your infinitives, whether you're in corporate or litigation.
Come on folks, surely all of this is good for at least four or five more pagesicechicken wrote:Never should have been a rule; it's something English grammarians decided we ought not do in English because it can't be done in Latin (because Latin infinitives are just inflected words). To ham-fistedly shoehorn rules from other languages into one's own is to needlessly waste time and energy.runinthefront wrote:FWIW, this is a dying ruleSmokeytheBear wrote:You split an infinitive, so I would start working on proofreading.