katerina turevich Jul 18, 2013:

Perhaps, I don't get out into this chatroom too often.
But it seems to me, the asker asked for some help to create a 'perfect' piece of copy. I found some inconsistencies.

Rachel Douglas Jul 18, 2013:

Thanks for explaining what you meant Most of what you propose seems to me like editorial overkill, for what appears to be a little piece of online chat.

katerina turevich Jul 17, 2013:

As for the “CIA agent” and his unexpected appearance, I would at least put “trained” in front of it: “one must be a trained CIA agent, to remember a face/someone from Facebook while…”.
But bottom line is that there would never have been any text like this if not for Adelia’s attentive friends.

katerina turevich Jul 17, 2013:

Rachel, " I would never have found that by myself, if not for someone ‘s kind advice. "
That's all I meant: join two sentences :: no need for an exclamation mark (two is one too many in one paragraph anyway) :: and you're giving the cause and effect in one complete thought. Get rid of any personal interruptions, like "I am very glad/happy that"…. makes it too long, and loses power.
You’re right, the missing indefinite articles (2) have to be added. That’s also what I meant, but I didn’t want to give the game away. (I posted my comment before variations on the text appeared as an answer). There are other platforms, if someone wants a stylistic advise on a whole paragraph, and on top of it, it doesn’t hurt to think for oneself. So I only mentioned some mistakes I found, just as requested.
But to give the game away; I’d also change the word “name” in the last sentence for the word “version”, especially because in the first sentence there is talk of ‘variations’ already. The objection to ‘name’ is logical: one already has a name, so Phinnaeus is a ‘version’ of that same given name.

Rachel Douglas Jul 17, 2013:

Out of curiosity... Katerina, where you wrote, that "two sentences in the middle are better joined into one[,] as [a] consequence based on its reason," which two sentences do you have in mind?

Realizing that all this was not the subject of the question, but just for fun:
- "take care of the (indefinite) articles" - But there ARE NO indefinite articles to be taken care of here; "take care of" in a context like this means to correct them or delete them. He needs to ADD some (I listed where).
- I think the chatty style with exclamation points is fine for what this appears to be, namely, a piece of highly informal online correspondence. As opposed to some literary text.
- Where on Earth does the notion come from that saying that one is "glad" or "happy" about something is "out of context" in English. You can say "I'm so-o-o-o happy that," "I'm really glad that," "I'm thrilled that," etc. In this case, the person is ecstatic about Adilya's friend (I guess) having informed him that his name can be Phinnaeus in some languages. He might have known that from Jules Verne's Phineas T. Fogg, though I guess the latter is always Phileas in Russian editions of "80 Days."

katerina turevich Jul 17, 2013:

you have a number of other (stylistic/grammatical) mistakes in the middle of the text, too. You should look at it closer yourself, or put it up as a question. I believe, there is a policy of a concrete 1 question at a time, but i'll give you a hint: if you watch your tenses, and don't use so many exclamation marks, but do take care of the (indefinite) articles, you 'll get what you want. Oh, yes, two sentences in the middle are better joined into one, as consequence based on its reason. That you are happy with all that, isn't really relevant here, i'd say, not in English. По русски можно сказать "я рада, что...", in English it appears out of context.

Maria Popova Jul 17, 2013:

Для информации: по-русски говорят - "при любой возможности", "при (каждом удобном) случае".

Finneas Mussen (asker) Jul 17, 2013:

sorry, I meant: "При каждом удачном случае"