Firstly, nearly everyone worked out that the best way to get your money back is to be calm, dispassionate and factual. It's tempting to let off steam, but the only practical effect of that (in a letter of complaint) is to make things take longer! The recipient of this letter probably just wants to get rid of you by paying you off (the sums involved are tiny), so she probably wants to avoid bad publicity, more than anything else. On the other hand, she's not going to admit anything that might end up costing the company mega-bucks in a court case!
There were one or two cases where the letter came across as much too informal too. You're trying to impress on the company that they're dealing with a professional - someone who's angry at the moment, but could easily be placated by the insertion of money into her bank account! You need to be strictly formal in this letter, so using 'get', short forms or friendly closures like 'Best regards,' aren't a good idea.
Here are some specific points about language which cropped up in Warm-Up 2:
1. Defining and non-defining relative clauses
Sorry to get all technical on you!
Relative clauses often start with 'which' or 'that', and there are some of them that provide information essential to your reader's understanding of what you're talking about ('defining relative clauses') and some which add a little extra information, but aren't strictly necessary for your reader to understand the basic message ('non-defining relative clauses'), like these ones:
Defining relative clause:
He gave her the password which opened her computer account.
(I.e. out of all the passwords in the world, this one was the special one which did the job.)
Non-defining relative clause
She used the password to open her account, which meant that she was able to answer her new boss' mail on time.
(I.e. using the password is one thing - answer the mail is another.)
Did you notice the punctuation?
Non-defining relative clauses use a comma, defining relative clauses don't.
What this comma does is shows your reader what connections you're making between information in your sentence. There are cases where getting this connection wrong can make it extremely difficult for your reader to understand what you're saying.
In the defining relative clause example above, for example, putting a comma in says that the password somehow opened the account all on its own, without her needing to do anything. You can imagine other sets of instructions where this might really confuse someone. Let's say they have to carry out two operations. Making what you need to carry out the first one use a non-defining relative clause could easily make someone imagine that they don't need to do anything else, like this:
Take the key, which opens the security lock, and fetch the file from the filing cabinet inside the file room.
(Non-defining relative clause … so it's 'extra', unimportant information … so the person fetching the file could well end up standing outside the room with a key in his hand, not realising that he has to use it to get into the room!)
Take the key which opens the security lock and fetch the file from the filing cabinet inside the file room.
(Defining relative clause - it's much more clear what the person has do now, isn't it.)
This may seem to be terribly unimportant, but remember that famous Swedish example:
Avrätta ej vänta!
(Execute - not - wait)
Is that 'Avrätta ej, vänta!' (Don't execute [him], wait!) or 'Avrätta, ej vänta!' (Execute [him], don't wait!)?
2. In/on/at
Prepositions often cause problems - it's usually more or less impossible to explain why you use one, not another. In this case though …
When you're talking about time and place,
IN is for the big things (in Sweden/in 2012)
ON is for the middle-sized things (on Main Street/on Monday)
AT is for specific points (at the corner of Main Street and Lexington/at 3.00 pm).
It is of greatest importance that the workers, to prevent injuries, are wearing proper footwear with reinforced soles and toecaps at all times while being on the site.
ReplyDeleteFurther on, to protect the workers from the pernicious noise level, hardhats with built-in ear muffs are strongly advised. Wearing hardhats on construction sites are compulsory by Swedish laws and the construction work will be suspended if these are not being followed.
The construction site is also showing lack of safety in safety barriers and fences for the workers, which always must be installed prior to work above ground level due to the risk of injuries.
Some of the plants that are being in use have expired test certificates and need to get emergency appointments at the test center for new certificates as soon as possible before bringing them back to work again.
(Caroline Klar)