About Plurals and Possessives

 

by Bobbie Christmas

 

 

Q: Is The Chicago Manual of Style the standard for editing nonfiction book manuscripts? What do you say about the comments below made by two editors I’ve used?

 

Original line of text from the manuscript:

 

In the late 80’s, I was living in Dallas, Texas running a company that I had founded.

 

Here’s the ensuing discussion over it:

 

Editor 2: 80s (no apostrophe because there is no possession—and you might want to use 1980s to make it even clearer)

 

Editor 1: This is a question of style. Each publisher will have its own style. This is one style.

 

A: Chicago Style is preferred by most book publishers, so it is safest to use it for any book-length manuscript, whether fiction or nonfiction. Let me address one point at a time.

 

Editor number two was correct: In the late 80s, without the apostrophe, is acceptable and complies with Chicago style. Without the apostrophe 80s is plural and refers to many years. With an apostrophe it would be possessive, meaning something that belonged to the 1980s. The editor is also correct that for clarity it’s better to write the full number: In the late 1980s.

 

If the author wanted to say something that belonged to that era, it would be written with an apostrophe: “One 1980’s spokesperson said…”

 

The state should be set off by two commas, one before and one after, another issue of grammar. I’m surprised neither editor addressed that point. Correct: “In the late 1980s, I was living in Dallas, Texas, running a company… 

 

You touched on a point that disturbs me whenever I see it. I spot the term “writer’s conference” all the time, and that form means that writers own the conference. The correct form should be “writers conference,” which means it is a conference for writers; it is not owned by writers. You’ll notice that my own ezine is called The Writers Network News for exactly that reason. It is for writers. It is not owned by writers, although you could say it is owned by one writer—me.

 

Overall my point is editor number one was incorrect; the issues were not a matter of style, but of grammar, and grammar remains the same in any style.

 

Q: Which is correct?

 

His patience and soft-spoken sense of humor helps students make sense of the sometimes confusing world wide web.

 

Or

 

His patience and soft-spoken sense of humor help students make sense of the sometimes confusing world wide web.

 

The latter, right? I don’t teach grammar, but the latter sounds correct.

 

A: The latter is correct, because of the plural subject (patience and humor). Strip the sentence of the extraneous words and use just the two abstract nouns as the subject, and it’s easier to see that it is plural: “Patience and humor help students …”

 

I spotted other issues, though. The sometimes confusing world wide web should be written this way: The sometimes-confusing worldwide web. Worldwide should be one word, and because both sometimes and confusing refer to one thing, the web, the term should be hyphenated.

 

Q: Explain to me this: it’s, its, and its’.

 

A: I always have to stop and think about it too, because it goes against convention. We think of words that end with an apostrophe followed by an “s” as being possessive, but in this one case, the possessive does not have an apostrophe. I’ll explain in detail.

 

“It’s” (with the apostrophe) is the contraction for “it is.” Example: It’s okay if John comes along. (We know “it’s” is a contraction, because the sentence can be written this way: It is okay if John comes along.) 

 

Its (without the apostrophe) indicates the possessive. Example: The seminar had its own schedule. 

 

Its’ is not a valid word.

 

The “its” words often get confused because they break the rules of possessive apostrophes. If you confuse these two words, you are not alone. Here’s a helpful hint: Every time you use it’s or its, ask yourself, “Am I saying IT IS?” If so, only then do you use the apostrophe (it’s).

 

***

 

Book Doctor Bobbie Christmas, author of Write In Style: How to Use Your Computer to Improve Your Writing and owner of Zebra Communications will answer your questions too. Send them to Bobbie@zebraeditor.com or BZebra@aol.com. Read Bobbie’s blog at https://www.zebraeditor.com/blog/.

Read More »

Leave a Comment apostrophe usage, Ask the book doctor, Bobbie Christmas, grammar, possessives

Ask the Book Doctor: About Participles and Gerunds

By Bobbie Christmas

Q: I’ve looked through all my grammar books and cannot find an explanation of why starting a sentence with a participle is a problem. I’m not talking about dangling modifiers.

Have you a source where I could find a paragraph explaining why something like this doesn’t work:

Swinging the door open, he reached inside.

A: The reason you can’t find anything negative about your example—Swinging the door open, he reached inside—is that nothing is wrong with it from a grammatical sense. In a creative sense, however, a problem can arise when too many sentences rely on participles or gerunds (“ing” words), because the usage grows repetitious. Worse, of course, is when sentences have dangling participles, such as in this example: Swinging the door open, the chair in the corner became apparent. As written, the chair swung the door open, because no other person or thing is said to have done the action; therefore, the sentence has a dangling participle.

Q: Here are two sentences that say the same thing but in slightly different ways:

a) He rode the bicycle, pedaling with quick bursts of speed.
b) He rode the bicycle and pedaled with quick bursts of speed.

Is the verb “pedaling” a gerund or a present participle? Second, is one way preferred over the other? Why?

A: I hate to quote grammar, because it’s confusing and boring, but here goes:

A gerund is a noun that is formed from a verb. To be a gerund, the word “pedaling” would have to be used as a noun, such as “Pedaling the bicycle was something he enjoyed.”

Participles join verbs to form complex tenses (as you suspect, a present participle in this case), yet can also be used as adjectives, as this sentence: “His pedaling hobby involves unicycles as well as bicycles.”

Where does that information leave us? Confused, right? You probably asked the question because my book Write In Style advocates avoiding gerunds and participles, although they cannot always be deleted. Also you’ll note I refer to them simply as “ing words,” because their classification doesn’t matter.

Why do I recommend that creative writers remove “ing” words when possible? For two reasons: Their overuse leads to repetition, plus many sentences with “ing” words often rely on weak verbs, such as forms of the verb “to be.” Weak verbs don’t show action, whereas verbs in active voice do. This sentence uses passive voice: He was dancing in the dark. This sentence uses active voice: He danced in the dark.

All that information aside, to answer your question, both your sample sentences are grammatical; the choice of which to use depends on the words and sentences surrounding that sentence. If one or more “ing” words appear nearby, choose sentence b); if not, sentence a) is fine.

Your examples both use strong language, but here is an example of weaker writing:

He was riding the bicycle, pedaling with quick bursts of speed. (This formation has two words ending in “ing” and relies on the weak, passive verb “was.”)

Q: I am curious to know why you attack the use of “snuck.” Why not give guidance on the proper use of the word instead of telling people to do blanket searches to remove it? This site defines “snuck” as the past tense and past participle of “sneak.”

You shouldn’t be urging people to drop the colorful irregular verbs in our language.

Please revise your information to reflect that “snuck” is good grammar and your advice is only your personal preference.

P.S. How do you feel about “shone” and “shined?”

A: I appreciate your challenge to my statement that “snuck” is substandard. I was not stating a personal preference, however. I was stating a fact, and I can back it up with a reliable resource.

Dictionaries reflect spoken language, and English certainly is a changing language. Spoken language is one thing, however, and written—literary—language is another. The fact that a word appears in the dictionary does not make it acceptable in all literary circles, and my job is to teach people how to write well. When writing dialogue, then, it’s fine to show characters using the word “snuck” when they mean “sneaked,” just as some people say “ain’t” when they mean “am not.” When writing narrative, however, use “sneaked” for past tense.

The word “snuck” has sneaked into our spoken language, but literary gurus are not prepared to embrace it in written work. As a book editor, I therefore must tell people not to use “snuck” in narrative, only in dialogue, as I said in my original post.

For the record, my resource is The Chicago Manual of Style 17th Edition, the standard in the book-publishing industry. Entry 5.250 says this: “Sneak is conjugated sneak—sneaked—sneaked. Reserve snuck for dialect and tongue-in-cheek usages.”

As for your question about my opinion about “shone” and “shined,” both are acceptable in literary circles. Sometimes writers have choices.

Thank you for your challenge and for being alert to English and its quirks. People like you—those who pay attention to the details of English—are my heroes. You keep English a vital, evolving language.

***

Bobbie Christmas, book editor, author of Write In Style: Use Your Computer to Improve Your Writing, and owner of Zebra Communications, will answer your questions too. Send them to Bobbie[at]zebraeditor[dot]com or BZebra[at]aol[dot]com. Read Bobbie’s Zebra Communications blog at https://www.zebraeditor.com/blog/.

Read More »

Leave a Comment Book Doctor, editing, gerunds, grammar

Friday Speak Out!: The Value of a Critique Group

by Kay Butzin

For Christmas I received a T-shirt with the slogan I’m silently correcting your grammar. I haven’t had the nerve to wear it in public yet.

In my living room, I’m not silent, yelling corrections at television announcers, reporters, and interviewees who abuse the English language. However, my critique group members require a different approach from either of these. My fellow writers want constructive feedback. They want to know what is working and what isn’t.

So I admire the vivid verb and precise noun, praise an original turn of phrase as well as point out the cliché in need of one. I give the effective detail a double + but also note anything extraneous or confusing, taking care to respect individual style and the language differences among genres. A critique is not a rewrite. A grammar nut can’t help but make corrections and suggestions, but I remember that the author is the final author-ity.

Questions for evaluating plot, character, dialogue and setting:

• Does every paragraph and scene advance the plot? Do details contradict or support each other? What needs clarification? What else would I like to know?
• Could descriptions and explanations show more and tell less? Do they advance or interrupt the flow of the narrative?
• Can I believe in the characters’ motivations?
• Does the dialogue serve to make a point or illustrate character?
• Where does the story take place? When?

In offering my own work for critique, I listen to the members’ comments with an open mind and a closed mouth. Not engaged in defending my work, I hear what my readers either misunderstood or didn’t understand at all.

Rules for receiving the best critique:

• Leave your feelings at the door.
• Avoid giving too much back story. Let the writing speak for itself.
• At the end if you haven’t received it, ask for any specific feedback you need.
• Thank the members for their help.

The amount and quality of input will exceed your expectations, and you will have to make yourself stop thinking about corrections to concentrate on the next member’s presentation.

Before and After, my first place winner in the Women On Writing Q4 2018 Nonfiction Contest drew both praise and criticism when I shared it. Someone even caught an error in subject-verb agreement! I made every change the members suggested, and their input deserves a large part of the credit for the essay’s success.

Therefore, any work I submit from now on will have to pass my critique group’s inspection first.

* * *

Kay Butzin writes for pleasure more than profit and enters flash fiction and nonfiction contests to help her stay motivated and productive. Her guest post, Journaling Through Life’s Transitions, recently appeared on the CreateWriteNow.com blog. She shuns social media but will respond to email at kaybutzin@gmail.com.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Would you like to participate in Friday "Speak Out!"? Email your short posts (under 500 words) about women and writing to: marcia[at]wow-womenonwriting[dot]com for consideration. We look forward to hearing from you!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read More »

6 comments creative nonfiction essay winner, critique group, critiquing, Friday Speak Out, grammar, Kay Butzin

Grammar Lovers Giveaway! The Joy of Syntax and That Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means

Grammarians, wordsmiths, teachers, writers, and other word nerds delight! We have two fantastic resource books to give away today from Ten Speed Press | Penguin Random House. The first guide will help you tighten your vocabulary and figure out if you’re using the right word the right way. (Think: affect/effect) The second book will help you write sentences in the correct order for meaning, or the most poetic order for lyricism. (Think: “What light breaks from yonder window?” or “What light from yonder window breaks?”) Yes, I’m talking about syntax. It’s the acrobatics that make our sentences varied and interesting. Both are must haves for your writer’s toolkit. They are clever in content, compact in size (and price), and witty in tone, which makes them the perfect gift for your writerly friends with the holidays right around the corner.

Spruce up your vocabulary and give your sentences a workout with these two books! Enter the Rafflecopter form at the bottom of this post for an opportunity to win these two gems.

*

That Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means: The 150 Most Commonly Misused Words and Their Tangled Histories by Kathryn Petras and Ross Petras

Hardcover: 208 Pages | 5 x 7 inches | Publisher: Ten Speed Press 2018 | ISBN-13: 978-0399581274 | Available on Amazon

An entertaining and informative guide to the most common 150 words even smart people use incorrectly, along with pithy forays into their fascinating etymologies and tangled histories of use and misuse.

Even the most erudite among us use words like apocryphal, facetious, ironic, meteorite, moot, redundant, and unique incorrectly every day. Don’t be one of them. Using examples of misuse from leading newspapers, prominent public figures and famous writers, among others, language gurus Kathryn Petras and Ross Petras explain how to avoid these perilous pitfalls in the English language. Each entry also includes short histories of how and why these mistakes have happened, some of the (often surprisingly nasty) debates about which uses are (and are not) mistakes, and finally, how to use these words correctly … or why to not use them at all. By the end of this book, every literati will be able to confidently, casually, and correctly toss in an “a priori” or a “limns” without hesitation.

About the Authors

Kathryn Petras and Ross Petras, a sister-and-brother writing team, are the authors of many non-fiction books including the New York Times bestseller You’re Saying It Wrong, and compilers of the bestselling page-a-day calendar The 365 Stupidest Things Ever Said (with over 4.8 million copies sold) and its counterpart The 365 Smartest Things Ever Said. Their work has received the attention of, or has been featured in, diverse media outlets including the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Wall Street Journal, Cosmopolitan, the Washington Post, the Huffington Post, Bustle, The Atlantic, the London Times, and McSweeney’s. They have also been guests on hundreds of radio and tv shows, including Good Morning America, CNN, Fox & Friends, and NPR’s Here and Now. They are currently working on a podcast for NPR affiliate KMUW entitled You’re Saying It Wrong.

*

The Joy of Syntax: A Simple Guide to All the Grammar You Know You Should Know by June Casagrande

Paperback: 272 Pages | 5 x 7 inches | Publisher: Ten Speed Press 2018 | ISBN-13: 978-0399581069 | Available on Amazon

Language columnist June Casagrande presents a fun and breezy guide to everything a grown-up interested in grammar needs to know.

When it comes to grammar, it seems like everyone—even die-hard word nerds—feel they "missed something" in school. The Joy of Syntax picks up where sixth grade left off, providing a fresh foundation in English syntax served up by someone with an impressive record of making this otherwise inaccessible subject a true joy. With simple, pithy information on everything from basic parts of speech and sentence structure to usage and grammar pitfalls, this guide provides everything you need to approach grammar with confidence.

About the Author

June Casagrande’s syndicated grammar column, "A Word, Please," runs in newspapers in five states. She is the author of four grammar books, including It Was the Best of Sentences, It Was the Worst of Sentences and The Best Punctuation Book, Period, and is the face and voice of the Grammar Underground weekly podcast. She works as a freelance copy editor for the advertising department at the Los Angeles Times and for several local and national magazines.

Visit her website, Grammar Underground, to find out more: http://www.grammarunderground.com.

*****BOOK GIVEAWAY*****

Enter to win a copy of That Doesn’t Mean What You Think It Means: The 150 Most Commonly Misused Words and Their Tangled Histories by Kathryn Petras and Ross Petras, and The Joy of Syntax: A Simple Guide to All the Grammar You Know You Should Know by June Casagrande! Fill out the Rafflecopter form below. We'll choose a winner next Monday, October 15th. Good luck!

a Rafflecopter giveaway

Read More »

11 comments grammar, grammar pitfalls, June Casagrande, Kathryn Petras, misused words, sentence structure, syntax

The Grueling Process of Submission (Part One): Hook, Proper Grammar, and To Be Verbs

Recently, I had a friend, David Kirkland, who is an editor of a small press, write and suggest a series of blog posts on mistakes he sees repeated in western, sci fi and fantasy submissions. As I read the list, I thought about the WOW! novel class I teach and the Summer 2016 Flash Fiction contest I will finish judging today and agreed with his points. These mistakes can make readers--who at the submission point are agents and editors--cringe.

I decided in October, before we get to NaNoWriMO and the craziness of writing 50,000 words in a month, I would cover the most important of these in a three-part series about submitting your manuscript. The following post is not just for genre writers, but for any fiction writers, and I would include memoir writers, too.

So, let's go.

1. Grammar and story must be spot on! David said, "Take your first three pages and ask: 'Would an agent be interested enough to ask for more?' This really has two aspects: Will it be viewed as polished work? Is the story engaging?"

This may seem like a no-brainer, but he's right. The beginning of your novel is the hardest to write. It's true that you need to turn in a manuscript that is grammatically correct. If grammar and you don't get along, then hire someone to help or ask a very good friend because it is time consuming. One error and a terrific manuscript will most likely NOT equal an automatic rejection. But trust me, agents, editors, and judges are looking for reasons to reject your manuscript and give someone else first prize.

As for: is the story engaging? Hopefully, you believe it is, or you wouldn't have taken the time to write it. But you need to find objective readers who will tell you the truth. This means you need a critique group, beta readers, or a developmental editor. Most of the time, writers fail to begin the story where they need to because they really want to make sure readers understand the characters and setting. Detach yourself from your beautiful beginning, and start the story just before the inciting incident, which changes the main character's life forever and propels him into the problem. 

Many people will tell you that you need a hook--something to get agents and editors excited about your work. Think of the books you like and consider their hook, which lures you in from the beginning. Not all books do it in the first pages, but when you are a debut author, getting that hook in there is important. 

Take for example the first paragraph of The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins:

When I wake up, the other side of the bed is cold. My

fingers stretch out, seeking Prim’s warmth but finding only

the rough canvas cover of the mattress. She must have had

bad dreams and climbed in with our mother. Of course, she

did. This is the day of the reaping.

Immediately, we know there is a narrator with a sister named Prim who must be scared about something, and this is the dreaded day of the reaping. The hook is that readers will ask themselves: What is the reaping? Why is Prim scared? 

David said, "Agents work on a commission, and so have to be selective and will expect it [your manuscript] to pass both tests [grammar and hook/story]."

2. "To be" verbs and passive voice: The other thing David mentioned, which I also see a lot of, is using forms of "to be" (i.e., is, was, am, are) instead of action verbs. This can often lead to passive voice or awkward sentence structure and wordiness. Many times when writers use a "to be" verb, they also use a weak action verb with an -ing and an adverb, which Stephen King says should be used on a rare occasion. Let me give you an example, instead of blabbering on about this point:

Amanda was walking slowly across the yard because she was avoiding talking to  her father. 

Amanda drifted through the yard to avoid a talk with her father.

(Maybe you have an even better way to fix it! We would love to see that in the comments below.)

Here's an example of passive voice, which should rarely be used and only when you do it on purpose:

Michael's boat was being scrubbed for the big race by the crew. 

Who is scrubbing? The crew! So, to make this active, they should come first.

The crew scrubbed Michael's boat in preparation for the big race. 

I'm not saying don't ever use a "to be" verb, especially in dialogue. When speaking, we use them all the time. What I am saying is watch out for overuse and for annoying adverbs and passive voice that can sneak in when you do. David suggests using a highlighter to mark these verbs in your submission pages, and decide if a stronger verb could do the job.

Stay tuned for Part Two coming on Wednesday, October 19.

Margo L. Dill is a writer, editor, teacher, and published author, living in St. Louis, MO. She blogs on a regular basis about being a single mom and writing at http://www.margoldill.com, where you can also find a list of her children's books. She teaches novel writing for WOW!, and you can find her class here. 

photo above by Guudmorning! on flickr.com

Read More »

3 comments grammar, literary agents, manuscript submission, Margo L. Dill, passive voice, writing craft, writing hooks

The Cardinal Sins of Writing (And Why You Should Give Them Up)

With Lent in full swing, many of us have given up something in the hope that we’ll become a better person. So I was thinking it’s a good time to give up some of our more despicable writing sins in the hope that we’ll become…well, employed.

You see, there are a number of blistering blunders that keep us from getting writing work. There are some mistakes that are so egregious that an agent, editor, or publisher will immediately pass on whatever we’ve offered, no matter how brilliant the concept, pitch, or query may be.

What are these epic errors? I thought you’d never ask.

The Worst Spelling Mistake Ever

You have spell check; you never have to worry about a spelling error. Except every writer knows that’s not true. Misspelled words often slip through, but I’m not talking about “food” when you meant to type “good.” That’s not exactly fingernails-on-the-chalkboard bad.

But when you write “their” and the sentence calls for “there” or possibly ‘they’re”, then you have just made my eyeballs bleed. Basically, you have signaled—nay, you have sent up a flaming flare—that says, “I’m not a professional writer!”

Always check your there/their/they’re! And you might also want to check yourself on the use of “lose” and “loose.” For some reason, this, too, is a common writing error. It’s definitely wince-worthy, but I don’t think you’ll lose a job over it. On the other hand, there is one punctuation error that you shouldn’t let run loose.

But It Was Only One Apostrophe

Ah, the poor apostrophe. Yes, you can talk about your commas all day long, but for my money, it’s the apostrophe that can really grab one’s attention and say, “Whoa! You have no idea how punctuation works!”

First, let’s make this point clear: its’ is never correct. If you want to show possession of an it, then it’s its.

Secondly, an apostrophe is not something to be thrown around willy-nilly, just to be on the safe side. If you are not sure how to make a plural or show possession with numbers or abbreviations or whatnot, then look it up. Because plenty of editors will let a misplaced comma go on its merry way, but an errant apostrophe will always stand out in a sentence.

The Grammar Thing

I’m not going to go into a long preamble here. I’m just going to say do not use a subjective pronoun in an objective phrase because you think it “sounds right.”

“I brought sandwiches for you and I” is never right.

No, it’s not.

NO.

I am so tired of hearing broadcasters say “I” when they should say “me.” I’m tired of reading it in the paper or hearing it at a conference. To be honest, I don’t know how editors, agents, or publishers feel about this particular wrong. But I am on a mission to stop it in its tracks before it becomes common usage.

So please, think before you write. Give up those cardinal writing sins once and for all, and may your workbasket be ever flowing!

~Cathy C. Hall

Read More »

14 comments apostrophe usage, Cathy C. Hall, grammar, spelling errors, their, there, they're

The Frugal Book Editor

You've written the book. Your job is done. Time for the agents, editors and publishers to do their job. Oh, wishful thinking. Because the fact is, with the many changes in the publishing world the responsibility for editing (and by editing I mean revisions, grammatical fixes and checks for typos and formatting problems) is falling more heavily on the shoulders of writers. So what's a writer to do? Carolyn Howard-Johnson has compiled her plan of attack in the second edition of The Frugal Book Editor.

The Frugal Book Editor: Do-it-yourself editing secrets for authors: from your query letter to

final manuscript to the marketing of your bestseller (second edition)

 

Author: Carolyn Howard-Johnson
Pages: 288
Publisher: CreateSpace (2015)
ISBN-10: 0978515870
ISBN-13: 9778-0978515874

Book Description:
There are gremlins out there determined to keep your work from being published, your book from being promoted. They -- resolved to embarrass you before the gatekeepers who can turn the key to success for you -- lurk in your subconscious and the depths of your computer programs. Whether you are a new or experiences author, The Frugal Book Editor will help you present whistle-clean copy (whether it's a one-page cover letter or your entire manuscript) to those who have the power to say "Yea" or "Nay." It won several awards including a USA Book News award.
The Frugal Book Editor is available in paperback and as an ebook on Amazon.

About Carolyn Howard-Johnson

In addition to her How to Do It Frugally Series of Books for Writers, Howard-Johnson has written novels. creative nonfiction poetry chapbooks and screenplays. She began her career as a staff writer at the Salt Lake Tribune before becoming an editorial assistant at Good Housekeeping Magazine. She has also written columns and reviews for a variety of newspapers and is an instructor for UCLA Extension Writers' Program. Her dedication to studying writing has taken her around the world: Cambridge University in the United Kingdom, Herzen University in St. Petersburg, Russia and Charles University in Prague

 Connect with Carolyn online:
Website: http://howtodoitfrugally.com/ 

Twitter: https://twitter.com/frugalbookpromo

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/carolynhowardjohnson

***** BOOK REVIEW: THE FRUGAL BOOK EDITOR *****

Review by Jodi Webb

Like most writers I dream of the editor who is going to take my manuscript, wave a magic wand and make it perfect. Too bad that mythical editor doesn't exist.

The Frugal Book Editor is crammed full of information that every writer can use in a publishing world where writers must also have (or hire) editing skills. Perhaps the most important tidbit author Carolyn Howard-Johnson shares is that, even if you or your publisher will be hiring a professional editor for your manuscript, you still need to know as much as possible about editing for two reasons:

1. An edited manuscript has a better chance of being accepted by an agent or editor.
2. A professional editor will do a better job if you've already edited the manuscript. If obvious mistakes have been corrected, a professional editor can concentrate on more subtle (but still important) problems.

In addition to providing a refresher course on grammar concepts such as split infinitives, apostrophes, gerunds, The Frugal Book Editor also reintroduces you to the magic of computers. For instance, Howard-Johnson will explain the problem of excessive adverbs and then take you step by step through using the functions of your computer to bring adverbs to your attention so you can do a little editing. I learned about many tools my computer has that I never knew about. Her book is generously illustrated with funny examples as well as pet peeves and advice from professionals in the publishing world. Howard-Johnson also offers her readers extras: free information and advice she'll provide for the cost of an email and several appendices that gather lists of information, reference books and sources. Although this book is full of the nitpicky details writers like to avoid when in a creative frenzy, she manages to make the book fun with her humorous voice.

As you read this book the first time, you might feel you can never absorb everything you need to know (that's how I felt). But it is the type of book you will find yourself returning to again and again for writing projects of all lengths and genres. The Frugal Book Editor will earn a coveted spot on your shelf of reference books.

Read More »

2 comments book editing, book formatting, Carolyn Howard-Johnson, grammar, The Frugal Book Editor

A New Style Guide? 5 Reasons (of Many!) to Read It

Photo Credit | EKHumphrey

You may see Steven Pinker’s The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century in the bookstore and dismiss it as just another style guide. Well, it’s not just another style guide. There are many reasons I would recommend this book to writers and editors. Here are my top five: 

1. The Sense of Style is conversational. I’ve read many dense and dry textbooks. (Haven’t we all?) Pinker makes the study of language accessible and, oddly, fun. He writes about grammatical concepts as if he’s explaining them to a relative. His balance of contemporary versus classic writing also reinforces the user-friendliness of the book. (It’s okay if your relative mentions Oedipus occasionally to make a point about sentence structure, but rather tiresome if those are the only examples.) 
2.  The Sense of Style is a visual book. No, it’s not a picture book; however, Pinker uses webs and diagrams and line drawings and nodes to illustrate his approach to writing well. His approach uses these “trees” to tease out how to build strong sentences. If you’ve ever had trouble with grammar, Pinker sympathizes with you, as a writer or reader. The line drawings help to illustrate not only grammar concepts but how confusing other concepts, like sentence diagramming can be. 
3.  Pinker deflates bad advice. Admittedly, I’ve never been a big fan of Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style and some other language books. One of the tenets of The Elements of Style—“14. Use the active voice”—most writers can recite in their sleep. Pinker writes early in his book that “Linguistic research as shown that the passive construction has a number of indispensable functions because of the way it engages a reader’s attention and memory.” He is a scientist and has research to reinforce his points on strong language.
4. Pinker embraces the fact that language has changed—and will—change over time. Throughout this guide, Pinker dissects classic and contemporary writing. In doing so, he manages to bring the reader with him on the journey of the changes of our language. He inspects the sentences, twisting them in the light and bringing the spotlight to a phrase or sentence structure. 
5. The Sense of Style has practical reference sections. How do the “purists” believe a word should be used and how is the word commonly used? Or what is the preferred usage of a word versus its problematic usage? Pinker lists some of the ones that trip up many writers and the lists are infinitely useful (and educational!). Along the way, Pinker inserts his humor. For example, in the Comment column he refers to one problematic usage as “Nails on a chalkboard.”

Is there a language book that you've enjoyed and has made you think of language a new way? If so, what book is it?

Elizabeth King Humphrey is a writer and editor enjoying reading outdoors in the fall weather. She has lately been spending a lot of time with pumpkins and warm drinks.

Read More »

3 comments common grammar mistakes, Elizabeth King Humphrey, grammar, language, Steven Pinker, style guides

Reviewing the Building Blocks of Writing

Some of my favorite building blocks for reviewing building
blocks: Style, the guide to punctuation, The Chicago Manual
of Style, Words into Type, and Garner's Modern American Usage

Among the other crazy things I’m planning for this June, I am taking a class on emerging technologies. I'm learning some basic coding--a heavy dose of HTML and a dollop of CSS. While I am starting to "get" looking at basic HTML coding and noting where a bracket or two is missing, I haven't quite learned the language fluently. But I’m able to recognize if there might be a missing piece.

At the same time, I'm designing a self-editing class and looking at elements I want to include in the course. Based on my HTML course, I think I’ve determined that returning to a review of our building blocks may be essential.

In my own writing, I will sometimes take shortcuts. And my grammar will suffer. (It’s like I’ve forgotten that I have a base for my language!)

When you write, you probably have fluidity because you use your (native) language skills in so many ways throughout any given day. But what happens if you are learning a new language for the first time or reviewing a foreign language you knew in high school? You return to the building blocks of the language and review what each means and, generally, review how the blocks fit together.

When you are editing your own work, do you slow down and really look that each sentence has a subject? What about an object? If you slow down to really look at your use of language--whether it's English, HTML or French—you should look at how each element of the sentence works to bring out the meaning you intended. Look at the building blocks to make sure they are there.

Often, as native speakers, we figure we’ve learned enough language skills and any mention of grammar makes our palms sweat. There are so many moving pieces to keep in mind. But I would encourage that every once in a while, you take a good look at the building blocks of language. Even a quick glance at an editing or grammar book can give your writing a boost. You might even learn a thing or two to improve your writing. Right now, I’m enjoying The Mentor Guide to Punctuation, which I picked up at a book sale. It helps me relax from learning HTML.

Do you have a favorite grammar book that you dip into regularly? What is one grammar problem you know you make, but do it anyway? What would you like to see in an editing class to help you improve your own writing?

Elizabeth King Humphrey is a writer and editor. She lives in North Carolina and frequently pulls out her blocks to play.

Read More »

2 comments building your reference library, craft of writing, editing, Elizabeth King Humphrey, grammar, Self-editing

Friday Speak Out!: My Name is Jocelyn, and I’m a Punctu-holic, guest post by Jocelyn Kasper

My Name is Jocelyn, and I’m a Punctu-holic

by Jocelyn Kasper

I’m on week four of a six-week WOW! Young Adult Novel Writing workshop with author Bonnie Hearn Hill. She’s got me on a no-exclamation-point diet. Bonnie says I’m in rehab.

F. Scott Fitzgerald said that an exclamation point is like laughing at your own joke. It’s a substitute for a lively little remark, added to the end of a perfectly good sentence, such as, “Isn’t that special?” Some people would substitute the word amazing to get the same effect. But I hate that word.

Bonnie says I need to use words, not punctuation, to express ideas and feelings. I told her I will lay off the punctuation brew and instead grow my language skills. I think my sentences are actually funnier, friendlier and smarter without exclamation points.

But sometimes I worry someone will think I’m drier than I mean to be. So I’ll add a colon and shift+zero, which, after a thoughtful tap of the space bar in a properly working Word program, turns into a smiley face, which is just as bad. I’m trying to get used to the new me.

Bonnie says get rid of colons and semi-colons in fiction. They’re too authorial. Let the reader get swept away by the writing, not by the writer. I want my readers to fall in love with my characters on their own and not notice there’s an author hanging around telling them how to feel about it.

Punctuation feels like music notation to me. In fact, like interpretation of music notation, it’s almost spiritual. A comma or em dash signals a musical rest of particular length and temper. Question marks and periods convey vocal inflections. But putting a word or phrase in italics or quotation marks (orphan quotes) for emphasis is off limits. Bonnie says not to think of myself as an actor, singer or composer, but as a writer. Again, use words.

This whole anti-punctuation thing is really just what the doctor ordered. You see, punctuation can make me feel like a smart person, even if I’m not. Like all those books on all those bookshelves do, which I haven’t read in years or ever.

Except for when I type smiley faces. I don’t feel so smart then. Just because I like to doodle, I shouldn’t scribble faces, parentheses, dots and other flyspecks all over my manuscripts to prove I’m smart. Or artistic.

Thanks to Bonnie, I’ve thrown my Punctuation Princess crown all the way across the valley. And still, I hear a million echoes of shattering glass, as it bounces from mountain to mountain.

It might seem like I’ve only learned junk about punctuation from Bonnie Hearn Hill. Or that punctuation is junk—on many levels—or both; but that wouldn’t be accurate. Oops. There goes a semi-colon.

I’ve been learning so much more. But you’ll have to wait for another blog day to hear about all the rest. In the meantime, use your words.


* * *

Jocelyn Kasper loves to write. In her spare time, she teaches people how to sing. She lives in Nashville, TN with her husband, three dogs and one cat. Read more at www.KasperMusic.com.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Would you like to participate in Friday "Speak Out!"? Email your short posts (under 500 words) about women and writing to: marcia[at]wow-womenonwriting[dot]com for consideration. We look forward to hearing from you!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read More »

19 comments Bonnie Hearn Hill, Friday Speak Out, grammar, Jocelyn Kasper, punctuation, WOW Classes

Give Your Writing a Revision Sweep

For the past week, I've been proofing and correcting articles written by my high school Intro to Journalism students. In most instances, like many professional writers, my students still struggle with the revision process.

"Nothing is perfect the first time," I chime. Are you listening?

Students shake their heads knowingly, but the next draft doesn't improve. What's a teacher - and a writer - to do?

I hand out a "sweep list", highlighters, and an article to each student and have them follow this six-step program. You may find it tightens your storytelling, too.

1. Follow the stylebook. The class uses its own stylebook for formatting, headlinges, grammar and usage, etc. When a writer submits a piece, the publication or publisher expects you to follow certain rules. For example, when I write for the newspaper, I'm expected to follow the AP Stylebook. When I submit poetry or fiction, many expect the piece to follow the Chicago Manual of Style. Best advice: familiarize yourself with the publication to which you are submitting and get up close and personal with the style guide.


2. Use your grammar text. My preferred text is The Little, Brown Handbook. It's thorough and addresses questions dealing with every aspect of writing.


3. Highlight to be verbs. Too many times, to be verbs indicate passive voice. And even if they don't push a sentence into passive mode, drop the helper verb and push it into a tighter, straightforward, stronger sentence.


4. Avoid pronouns. Pronouns tend to cloud a sentence by making an unclear reference. Make sure each incidence of pronoun use makes sense!


5. Keep dialogue tags simple. Beginning writers like to pepper a quote with flowery dialogue tags. In journalism, the KISS method works best. A simple "said" carries a sentence/quote.


6. Evict adverbs. Writers rely on the -ly words, but in a number of instances, the adverb does not add new information to the piece. Adverb overload slows the timing and rhythm. Use sparingly and for impact.

Revising and strengthening a story doesn't need to be a difficult process. A sweep list may make your nonfiction article or flash fiction piece squeaky clean! Or, at least impress an editor.

by LuAnn Schindler. Read more of LuAnn's work at http://luannschindler.com.

Read More »

1 comment adverb usage, dialogue, dialogue tags, grammar, grammar tips, LuAnn Schindler, pronoun use, revision tool, style guides, to be verbs, writing styles