Linguistic opinions sought

[railsquid]

Random linguistic survey: does this sentence sound correct: "Specifications are included in the file 'xyz', which see for additional details"?

[emjaybee]

No.

[emjaybee]

Random linguistic survey: does this sentence sound correct: "Specifications are included in the file 'xyz', which see for additional details"?

Specifications and additional details are included in the file 'xyz'.

[themadhippy]

if the which goes it reads ok
"Specifications are included in the file 'xyz',  see for additional details"

[ntpntpntp]

Refer to file 'xyz' for specifications and additional details.

[emjaybee]

Are we doing his homework?

[Trainfish]

"which see for additional details"?

Should read "see the witch for details". That's what I do anyway 

[jpendle]

No,

Sounds like Singlish to me.

John P

[Lawrence]

if the which goes it reads ok
"Specifications are included in the file 'xyz',  see for additional details"

See what for details? there is no subject in that second part of the sentence

We need to know where the specifications are and where the aditional details are.

If they are all in the same place then

Refer to file 'xyz' for specifications and additional details.

is just fine, otherwise

"Specifications are included in the file 'xyz', see 'abc' for additional details"

would be more accurate where there are two separate subjects

[BobB]

I use electronic translators and am used to rather oddly constructed sentences. I am happy as long as the general meaning is understood !

[Bealman]

La plume de ma tante est dans l'oreille du chat.

[emjaybee]

La plume de ma tante est dans l'oreille du chat.

Aia ka hulu o koʻu ʻanakē i ka pepeiao o ka pōpoki.

[Bealman]

Oui!

[Philip.]

Ir-rix taz-zija tinsab fil-widna tal-qattus.

[weave]

Morning all,

OP, besides no, why?

and the last few posts  .

Please be gentle with my brain, have run out of coffee