- Messages
- 8,173
- Reaction score
- 9,899
- Points
- 113
I'm just back from a weekend away celebrating an aunt's 80th at a knees-up attended by around 50 relations, most of whom I hadn't seen for years - and have spent an awful lot of time chasing my granddaughter around - so am a bit knackered. But a few random thoughts:
I think the white background is best, for the reasons arealhuman gives.
I don't like the versions with, e.g. 'Check do a quick check...' because it doesn't make sense grammatically. I would prefer 'Check: Do a quick check...'. Or maybe 'Check to see who's...' (though this approach won't work for all of the points).
I see your point about 'presume' or 'assume', but prefer 'assume'. The reason for this is that although, yes, the dog being on lead is evidence, we don't want want people to be weighing up the probabilities and deciding accordingly, we want them to simply keep their dog on lead regardless. Often, there may be good reasons to think that it is OK to let their dog approach, but we don't want them to make that decision - we just want a simple 'Dog on lead' = 'don't let your dog approach', without taking any other factors into account (apart from, say, being told by the other person that it's OK to let their dog say hello). Does that make sense?
I don't really like the bit about tail wags - it makes what is a straightforward sentence very disjointed. Also, the semi-colon after the 'caution' should be the comma. I suggest:
'A wagging tail does not always mean a dog wants to meet another dog. Depending on the wag, it can mean high alert or arousal, aggression or caution!'
I think the white background is best, for the reasons arealhuman gives.
I don't like the versions with, e.g. 'Check do a quick check...' because it doesn't make sense grammatically. I would prefer 'Check: Do a quick check...'. Or maybe 'Check to see who's...' (though this approach won't work for all of the points).
I see your point about 'presume' or 'assume', but prefer 'assume'. The reason for this is that although, yes, the dog being on lead is evidence, we don't want want people to be weighing up the probabilities and deciding accordingly, we want them to simply keep their dog on lead regardless. Often, there may be good reasons to think that it is OK to let their dog approach, but we don't want them to make that decision - we just want a simple 'Dog on lead' = 'don't let your dog approach', without taking any other factors into account (apart from, say, being told by the other person that it's OK to let their dog say hello). Does that make sense?
I don't really like the bit about tail wags - it makes what is a straightforward sentence very disjointed. Also, the semi-colon after the 'caution' should be the comma. I suggest:
'A wagging tail does not always mean a dog wants to meet another dog. Depending on the wag, it can mean high alert or arousal, aggression or caution!'