Just and Only

[FireJimTressel.com]

Does anyone else get riled up when you read the words "just" and "only?" I've always been taught you limit the use for both specifically for when referring to one of something.
So, you could say, "Johnny Hotshot allowed only one hit in four innings." But you could not say, "Suzie Shortpants allowed herthree walks last game."

I say you shouldn't use "just" or "only" for anything other than one because otherwise you wouldn't know where to draw the line. Three hits? Four Field Goals? Five first downs? Six free-throw attempts? Hopefully you get my point.

Also, isn't it editorializing to suggest the reader should think five first downs or six free-throw attempts is a low number of those stats?

 

[Willie-Butch]

Agreed.

 

[Write-brained]

Just when it's necessary. And only then.

 

[SuperflySnuka]

Isn't it also editorializing to use "just one hit?"

I say, if it works for a particular sentence, use it. If there is no need, don't use it. Sometimes, it adds emphasis...

 

[FireJimTressel.com]

Isn't it also editorializing to use "just one hit?"

I say, if it works for a particular sentence, use it. If there is no need, don't use it. Sometimes, it adds emphasis...

Superfly has spoken, and I agree. We all will abandon all use of the words "just" and "only."

 

[SuperflySnuka]

well, I only have 82 posts, so my word isn't in stone. Sorry, I had to use it just this once...

I'm such an ass...

 

[FireJimTressel.com]

Ha ha! Fitting, though. Good one.

 

[MertWindu]

I think when you're trying to make the point that it wasn't a high total, there's nothing wrong with it. I find myself using just and only a lot in roundups, when you're trying to pack a little plot into a very small space. Helps the reader get the hint. But if you don't have the common sense to know that "just" should not precede, say, five hits in a seven inning game, then you probably shouldn't use it at all.

 

[spnited]

well, I only have 82 posts, so my word isn't in stone. Sorry, I had to use it just this once...

I'm such an ass...

If you're going to use only, superfly, use it correctly:

"I have only 82 posts..." not "I only have....."

 

[SuperflySnuka]

True, spnited...

 

[Dan Rydell]

nothing wrong with it at all.

guy goes nine innings, gives up just three hits, or five, that's pretty good.

i think there are much better issues to worry about.

 

[WildBillyCrazyCat]

Two of the most overused words in copy.

They're unnecessary 90 percent of the time.

And to borrow from Dan's example, a guy goes nine innings and gives up three hits, you don't have to tell the reader that he gave up just three hits. Three hits over nine innings is pretty good, and the reader understands this. We don't have to hit 'em over the head with the fact that it was a good performance.

 

[Ace]

Technically, the use of "allow" is wrong. He didn't allow the hits and she didn't allow the walks, presumably. They came despite their best efforts to keep either from happening.

 

[Twoback]

Does anyone else get riled up when you read the words "just" and "only?" I've always been taught you limit the use for both specifically for when referring to one of something.
So, you could say, "Johnny Hotshot allowed only one hit in four innings." But you could not say, "Suzie Shortpants allowed herthree walks last game."

I say you shouldn't use "just" or "only" for anything other than one because otherwise you wouldn't know where to draw the line. Three hits? Four Field Goals? Five first downs? Six free-throw attempts? Hopefully you get my point.

Also, isn't it editorializing to suggest the reader should think five first downs or six free-throw attempts is a low number of those stats?

Your last question reflects the most anal approach to sportswriting I've encountered. I think you're qualified to be a sports editor now.

 

[SF_Express]

The words can be instructional in limited use, to me.

 

[Ike Broflovski]

well, I only have 82 posts, so my word isn't in stone. Sorry, I had to use it just this once...

I'm such an ass...

Your first post is correct, Superfly, but you need to get busy. If you make 200 posts a day, you can catch Boots within only a year. But he'll be posting at the same time, so . . . 10 years.

 

[FireJimTressel.com]

Also, isn't it editorializing to suggest the reader should think five first downs or six free-throw attempts is a low number of those stats?

Your last question reflects the most anal approach to sportswriting I've encountered. I think you're qualified to be a sports editor now.

Thank God. All my dreams have come true.