<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Scared Yet?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.word-detective.com/2009/01/scared-yet/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.word-detective.com/2009/01/scared-yet/</link>
	<description>Semper Ubi Sub Ubi</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 19:32:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen</title>
		<link>http://www.word-detective.com/2009/01/scared-yet/comment-page-1/#comment-663</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 02:35:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.word-detective.com/?p=1226#comment-663</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t read the WSJ, so I don&#039;t know their political bent. But it seems to me that this usage could simply mark a word or phrase as a keyword, a shorthand reference to what someone else says or is known to say without actually quoting the other person. One does not necessarily have to interpolate a judgmental &quot;so-called&quot; into the text where so-called &quot;scare quotes&quot; are used.

I know I sometimes find myself making an informal and very non-standard distinction between single and double quotation marks, where double quotation marks are for an exact quotation, and single quotation marks are for an approximate quotation, so to speak. Thus I may use single quotation marks as I described above, to highlight a word or phrase as a reference to something specific without having to spell it out in detail each time. This &#039;quotation mark rule&#039; is, as I say, my own little quirk, but I find it useful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><!-- google_ad_section_start -->I don&#8217;t read the WSJ, so I don&#8217;t know their political bent. But it seems to me that this usage could simply mark a word or phrase as a keyword, a shorthand reference to what someone else says or is known to say without actually quoting the other person. One does not necessarily have to interpolate a judgmental &#8220;so-called&#8221; into the text where so-called &#8220;scare quotes&#8221; are used.</p>
<p>I know I sometimes find myself making an informal and very non-standard distinction between single and double quotation marks, where double quotation marks are for an exact quotation, and single quotation marks are for an approximate quotation, so to speak. Thus I may use single quotation marks as I described above, to highlight a word or phrase as a reference to something specific without having to spell it out in detail each time. This &#8216;quotation mark rule&#8217; is, as I say, my own little quirk, but I find it useful.<!-- google_ad_section_end --></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.227 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2013-03-21 14:23:13 -->