On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Sue Spence wrote:
> Mark Fowler wrote:
> > On 18 Oct 2001, Steve Mynott wrote:
> > > [ a mail rant]
> > [ more mail ranting ]
>
> I find the widespread practice of cutesy footnoting to be far more
> irritating than any of the other complaints which have come through my
> inbox today. Do you care? I doubt it. Say, here's an idea. How about we
> all keep our fussy, neurotic complaints about the way others format
> their email to ourselves?
>
Footnotes [1] are used by writers [2] to add further detail to their
prose [3] or to point to a source of reference [4]. Sometimes the use of
footnotes [5] can reach a ridiculous level [6]. [7]. Often a reader will
turn over a new page and seeing footnotes [8] at the bottom will read these
before arriving at the point in the text where the footnote [9] has its
effect.
Of course it is possible to write an entire paragraph which details an idea
or argument which is contained only within that paragraph, this makes
footnotes [10] unnecessary [11].
[1] These things down here.
[2] And, as rumour has it, authors as well.
[3] Or, if pressed, their poetry.
[4] For instance, the _Oxford Compendium of Footnotes, Asterisked Passages
and other Literary Get-Outs_
[5] See [1].
[6] Where the main body of the writing appears at the bottom of the page,
in cases like this, it becomes very hard to follow the flow of ideas
from the author.
[7] If you see a passage like this, you are best advised to place your
finger on the part of the page that you were redirected from, so as to
more easily locate it after reading all the footnotes [1],[5].
[8] See [1],[5] and [7].
[9] See [1],[5],[8] also [7].
[10] See [1],[5],[7],[8] and [9].
[11] But where would be the fun in that.
Alex Gough
