>>> Tree slugs have an annoying knack of disrupting spellcasting with their secretions. As such, you’d do well to keep the creatures away from any mages in your party. <<<
I thought that the use of “as such” is justified only when the “such” refers to a noun in a previous sentence. But in this sentence, the writer seems to have used “as such” for no other reason than to mean something like “therefore”. Is this the correct usage?
Incidentally, should the noun “mage” take the singular or plural form when coupled with the word “any”? Many thanks.
Strictly speaking, “as such” means “in that capacity”, or “as being what the [already-mentioned] name or description implies”. (“Joe is a medical practitioner who has examined the deceased and, as such, he has the authority to certify the cause of death”).
But the OED notes the looser meaning of “accordingly, consequently, thereupon” and says that it is “colloq. or vulgar”. So, it’s a recognised usage, but not necessarily a good one in all contexts, at least in BrE.
I think Melia Antiqua is right, here. The phrase “as such” might well have gotten bastardized in ways like UDS suggests, and as such, gets used in unconventional ways.
But I think here, the “as such” refers to those tree slugs that have an annoying knack of sliming spells. Thus, the sentence beginning with “As such” really ought to say something more about those slugs. Perhaps, for example, “As such, they [the slugs] should be kept away from your magi.”
I think the text as given is just semantically erroneous, unexpectedly changing the reference from the slugs to “you”.
The intent looks OK. The writer hopes to answer the question “As what?” with “As secreting tree slugs,” but the sentences are clumsily constructed. You’d does not follow the implied phrase.
Something like this would work.
Tree slugs have an annoying knack of disrupting spellcasting with their secretions. As such, they’d be best kept away from any mages in your party.
In fact, I think the writer was intending to answer the question “as what?” with “things that disrupt spellcasting” (disrupted spells would be a problem for a mage, slime itself probably isn’t).
And your version doesn’t resolve the non-standard use of “as such” which needs to refer to a noun or noun phrase that has been applied to the subject of the previous sentence. The simplest way to fix the quote (while still using “as such”) would be:
This provides a noun phrase (“arboreal gastropods with an annoying knack of disrupting spellcasting with their secretions”) for the “such” of “as such” to refer to.
Which would leave us with “As arboreal gastropods with an annoying knack of disrupting spellcasting with their secretions you’d do well to keep the creatures away from any mages in your party.” You are not the arboreal gastropod etc.
Yeah that would work. I think the original author should avoid the phrase. Which is unfortunate because it’s quite effective when used properly. My high school English master used to use it a bit. Usually in the form of criticism of class behavior.
I am an American high school English teacher (pause, respectfully uncover, and ponder on what my life is like) with a dangerously low tolerance for uncoordinated syntax. As such, no. Just no.
I think many people use phrases like “as such” without really understanding how it’s supposed to be used. Some think that inserting such a phrase somehow adds elegance or respectability, when in fact erroneous use has the opposite effect. It’s like dressing up by putting on a necktie backwards. But a descriptivist will tell you that if enough people wear their neckties backwards, it is no longer an error and is now “fashion.” (Use of “per se” by those who have no idea what it means is one of my all-time pet peeves.)
