[scoot]

> it can chainload into e.g. an EFI image

Off topic, but does anyone know a good resource that explains how to correctly use "e.g."? (I've looked before, but didn't find one)

While I may seem like a grammar pedant, there are many things that have entered common use while arguably incorrect that I'm not so bothered about ("That begs the question", for example). However while this (incorrect) use of "e.g." is a hill I will die on, even so, I struggle to explain why it's just plain wrong. (It can be used to replace "for example" when preceding a list if examples that illustrate a point, but not as a generic replacement as in this case.)

Someone somewhere must have explained it better...

[teo_zero]

> while this (incorrect) use of "e.g." is a hill I will die on, even so, I struggle to explain why it's just plain wrong.

Are there many such things you would die for without even knowing why? :)

"Exempli gratia" translates quite literally to "for the sake of example". I see no grammatical reasons why you shouldn't use it as the GP used it.

Are you sure you are not mistaking e.g. with i.e.? The latter stands for "id est" and means "that is", but the two are often confounded, and it's not unusual to find i.e. used to introduce an example. If the GP had used i.e., that would be a hill to die on.

[scoot]

> Are there many such things you would die for without even knowing why?

I didn't say I don't know why. I said that finding good reference material to explain it is hard to find.

> Are you sure you are not mistaking e.g. with i.e.?

Yes, I'm sure. I'm surprise that if you know the difference, you don't know the correct usage.

[sakjur]

Chicago Manual of Style [6.51, 5.250], though I'd argue this is pedantry for casual conversation. From 6.51: "[...]Note that in formal writing, Chicago prefers to confine the abbreviations i.e. ("that is") and e.g. ("for example") to parentheses or notes, where they are followed by a comma".

I think a secondary argument could be made that i.e. and e.g. are typically used to clarify something in a second clause; e.g., "it can chainload into any form of boot image (e.g., an EFI image or a Linux kernel) rather than being restricted to the PXE image format".

I would recommend picking up a copy of CMOS if you are in want of good ways to explain English grammar. English is my secondary language, and it's occasionally helpful for me to have access to a reference for its grammar when I struggle with understanding a concept. Just keep in mind that languages are bendable and any guide is descriptive and not prescriptive for informal communication.

[scoot]

Belated upvote for answering the question, in contrast to the many who downvoted because they don't understand how to use "e.g." correctly, and were too lazy to find out.

[ac29]

> It can be used to replace "for example" when preceding a list if examples that illustrate a point

I think you've already understood it.

[scoot]

I think so too, but many references fail to explain it in a way that isn't ambiguous at best.

[ddulaney]

Is this wrong? I always mentally replace "e.g." with "for example" (so this sentence is "it can chainload into, for example, an EFI image"). That sounds right to me. This seems like somebody doing it right :)

[scoot]

Yes, it wrong. "e.g." isn't a direct substitute for "for example". Honestly, it's best avoided as so many people confuse "e.g." and "i.e.", but if you're going to use it, at least use it correctly.