Best way to word a sentence [on hold]












0















As I've been trying to decide which one, if any, of the following sentences is the best way to say what I'm trying to say, I was hoping that the writers/editors/grammarians here would help me do that.





  1. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. The account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


  2. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation; it should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


  3. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. Jurisprudence teaches that the account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.





I prefer 2 because it is more concise than the others, but I'm wondering if "it" following the colon is an ambiguous pronoun.



Any help would be appreciated.










share|improve this question















put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Mitch, Jason Bassford, Skooba, Mark Beadles, 9fyj'j55-8ujfr5yhjky-'tt6yhkjj 2 days ago


Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




















    0















    As I've been trying to decide which one, if any, of the following sentences is the best way to say what I'm trying to say, I was hoping that the writers/editors/grammarians here would help me do that.





    1. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. The account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


    2. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation; it should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


    3. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. Jurisprudence teaches that the account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.





    I prefer 2 because it is more concise than the others, but I'm wondering if "it" following the colon is an ambiguous pronoun.



    Any help would be appreciated.










    share|improve this question















    put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Mitch, Jason Bassford, Skooba, Mark Beadles, 9fyj'j55-8ujfr5yhjky-'tt6yhkjj 2 days ago


    Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.


















      0












      0








      0








      As I've been trying to decide which one, if any, of the following sentences is the best way to say what I'm trying to say, I was hoping that the writers/editors/grammarians here would help me do that.





      1. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. The account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


      2. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation; it should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


      3. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. Jurisprudence teaches that the account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.





      I prefer 2 because it is more concise than the others, but I'm wondering if "it" following the colon is an ambiguous pronoun.



      Any help would be appreciated.










      share|improve this question
















      As I've been trying to decide which one, if any, of the following sentences is the best way to say what I'm trying to say, I was hoping that the writers/editors/grammarians here would help me do that.





      1. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. The account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


      2. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation; it should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.


      3. Jurisprudence teaches that a bystander’s account of a crime should not be unequivocally accepted simply because of his or her position or reputation. Jurisprudence teaches that the account should be unequivocally accepted only after the facts underpinning it have been empirically confirmed.





      I prefer 2 because it is more concise than the others, but I'm wondering if "it" following the colon is an ambiguous pronoun.



      Any help would be appreciated.







      punctuation pronouns






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 days ago









      Jessica Tiberio

      938614




      938614










      asked 2 days ago









      SkaterSkater

      92




      92




      put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Mitch, Jason Bassford, Skooba, Mark Beadles, 9fyj'j55-8ujfr5yhjky-'tt6yhkjj 2 days ago


      Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.






      put on hold as primarily opinion-based by Mitch, Jason Bassford, Skooba, Mark Beadles, 9fyj'j55-8ujfr5yhjky-'tt6yhkjj 2 days ago


      Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
























          0






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          0






          active

          oldest

          votes








          0






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes

          Popular posts from this blog

          If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

          Alcedinidae

          Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]