Timeline for What does "bring out that fact" mean in the given context?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Apr 21, 2022 at 15:27 | vote | accept | UNKNOWN | ||
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:56 | comment | added | Lambie | Yes, and poor legalese. In contracts, etc., they sometimes do leave out the articles. bring out=emphasize. | |
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:42 | vote | accept | UNKNOWN | ||
Apr 20, 2022 at 16:54 | |||||
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:37 | answer | added | PPH | timeline score: 0 | |
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:26 | comment | added | stangdon | I don't think there's anything wrong with the writing, it's just in "legalese" - they're using "Auditor" as though it were a proper name. | |
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:25 | history | edited | stangdon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
formatting
|
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:21 | comment | added | James K | But if you're not certain, you need to speak to whoever wrote that in the first place, as they haven't expressed themselves clearly in idiomatic English. | |
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:20 | history | edited | James K | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:20 | comment | added | James K | That source is not public. This is not written in good English. In particular the use and repetition of a proper noun "Auditor" is very strange. I I would assume that the auditor should do both (1) and (2). Present both contradictory facts and state that he is unable to find further evidence. | |
S Apr 20, 2022 at 15:17 | history | edited | UNKNOWN | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
improved phrasing and structure
|
S Apr 20, 2022 at 15:17 | history | suggested | Joachim | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
improved phrasing and structure
|
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:03 | comment | added | Joachim | What is the source of that text? | |
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:03 | review | Suggested edits | |||
S Apr 20, 2022 at 15:17 | |||||
S Apr 20, 2022 at 15:00 | review | First questions | |||
Apr 20, 2022 at 15:03 | |||||
S Apr 20, 2022 at 15:00 | history | asked | UNKNOWN | CC BY-SA 4.0 |