The Rauch Motel

You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave

Archive for Grammar

Jan 11, 2008

Something new

I promised yesterday that I’d have a new feature today.

I did a little rearranging of my blog. I took out the what I’m reading page, because I never remember to update it and I never seem to be near the computer when I finish a book. But to give you an idea, I have a bunch of the books on the go right now. I’m re-reading Bridget Jones’s Diary, because the CBC ran the movie and the sequel like a million times last week, and I’m part of the way through: Eve Kenin’s Driven, Neil Gaiman’s American Gods, and something else I can’t seem to remember. (Tho, I have Megan Hart’s Broken, which I’m dying to start, but am holding off ’til I finish one or more of the other books I’m in the middle of.) And I just finished Rachel Caine’s Stray, and Jacqueline deMontravel’s Escape from Bridezilla.

And I added a new page. I know I’d initially intended for Fridays to be Ask the Grammar Geek day, but people stopped sending me questions. But what’s funny is that where so many people get random sex-related search words that bring people to their blogs, almost all of my search terms are grammar-related.

So I created a new page… Ask the Grammar Geek. That page is going to be a giant Q&A free-for-all. Post a question in the comments and I’ll answer it. (well, within reason. I obviously won’t answer questions about a specific submission or manuscript. And I may be secretive about personal questions. *grin*) But grammar? publishing? editing? writing? even web design… hit me with your best shot.

1 Comment  •  Posted in Ask the Grammar Geek, Editing, Grammar, News

Oct 04, 2007

Woohoo! :)


You Scored an A


You got 10/10 questions correct.

It’s pretty obvious that you don’t make basic grammatical errors.
If anything, you’re annoyed when people make simple mistakes on their blogs.
As far as people with bad grammar go, you know they’re only human.
And it’s humanity and its current condition that truly disturb you sometimes.

1 Comment  •  Posted in Geekery, Grammar

Aug 10, 2007

The Impotence of Proofreading

Probably not exactly safe for work, but darn hilarious nonetheless…

If y’ever wondered why ya need an editor:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjhOBiSk8Gg]

2 Comments  •  Posted in Editing, Grammar

Apr 13, 2007

Ask the Grammar Geek 3

So, rather than answer a specific question, I’m gonna go on a little mini-rant…

Two weeks ago, I talked about how to use the apostrophe with a word that ends in ‘s’. Today, I want to talk about how else to use an apostrophe. Because I see it wrong all.the.time. and it drives me absolutely nuts.

Right now, the apostrophe just seems to show up willy nilly all over the place… the worst is when making any word plural. Please, for the love of all that is grammatically correct, please don’t do this.

Here’s a handy-dandy rule for remembering how to use the apostrophe:
An apostrophe is used for omission and possession.

Omission – if you’ve taken out a letter or two (i.e., don’t (do not), wouldn’t (would not), it’s (yes, it’s – it is, take out the second i and you have it’s) )

Possession – If something belongs to the person/thing you are referring to (Grammar Geek’s rant, The cat’s bowl. One exception… its. Because then it would be “it is”…)

There is one teeny, tiny exception to this… when you are taking one letter (and only one letter) and you’re making it plural, then you use the apostrophe before the s. Why? Mostly to avoid confusion. For example: He got straight A’s, She had to mind her p’s and q’s. Imagine those without the apostrophe. Yikes.

Other than that, please do not use the apostrophe. Want to say something is plural? No apostrophe. There are cats, there are dogs, there are books. Unless you have something that belongs to the cat or the dog or the book, get rid of your apostrophe.
Going to the store to get a new pile of PCs and DVDs and CDs? Yup, no apostrophe there either.

I keep hearing, oh, but I want to separate the thing from the ‘s’. Um. Why? Are people that dumb that they won’t understand what PCs are? or DVDs? or books? I don’t think so. (or, at least, I hope not. :) ) But for me, if I see PC’s, I think, hm, the PC’s what? Which is more confusing than ‘separating’ the word from the ‘s’.

Just remember the rule… omission and possession. And you’ll have a happy Grammar Geek.

Hope that helps!

6 Comments  •  Posted in Ask the Grammar Geek, Grammar

Mar 30, 2007

Ask the Grammar Geek 2

Today’s question comes from Kis, who says:

when using the possessive of names that end in S, is it Alexis’ dog, or Alexis’s?. Because I’ve seen both.

Well, the fact of the matter is, it depends. :) I went to three style guides for this question, because while personally, I prefer the clean lines of just the apostrophe without the extra ‘s’, there is much controversy over this issue.

The Canadian Press stylebook, which is based on the American Press stylebook says:

plural nouns ending in s take an apostrophe alone … singular nouns and names ending in s (or an s sound) normally take an ‘s … but names ending with an -iz sound and classical names often take only an apostrophe … [whereas] names ending in a silent s or x take and apostrophe and s

Heh, confused yet? Let’s look at Essentials of English:

The possessive case of nouns is formed by adding an apostrophe and an s to words which do not end with an s or a z sound: the boy’s room, the children’s school; and by adding only the apostrophe to words which do end with an s or a z sound: the boys’ room, Dickens’ novel. If however, the word ending in s or z is a proper name with only one syllable, an apostrophe and an s are added to the word: Keats’s sonnets, Santa Claus’s reindeer.

And that in some ways contradicts the first one, doesn’t it? Ok, let’s go to Chicago Manual of Style, which is one of the more popular style guides. What’s really interesting, is CMOS uses the Dickens example, only the exact opposite… as it basically says with the exception of a few classical examples (Jesus’, Moses’, Euripides’), always add an apostrophe and an s.

That being said, section 6.30 says this:

How to form the possessive of polysyllabic personal names ending with the sound of s or z probably occassions more dissension among writers and editors than any other orthographic mattter open to disagreement.

So bottom line, two of the guides say it would be Alexis’s and one says Alexis’. So which should you use? As I said, it depends. Most importantly, I think, is to stay consistent. Pick one and stick with it throughout your work. You’ll also find that most publishers – book, magazine, website, etc. have one preferred style guide and will conform completely to that style, so where you may have picked Alexis’, your editor may choose to go with a different style guide, and change them all to Alexis’s.

Hope that helps! :)

6 Comments  •  Posted in Ask the Grammar Geek, Grammar

Mar 23, 2007

Ask the Grammar Geek

Ugh, I’m a little behind after things in my world got turned on their heads yesterday, so I’m still reeling from some news that has much good and much bad all at once… I’ve given myself ’til Monday to wallow and then I have to put new plans and goals in place.

But, ta-dah, as promised, my first edition of Ask the Grammar Geek:

This question came a few weeks ago in the comments and I never got the chance to answer it, so here goes:

Hey, Grammar Geek – I need help! Forgive me for butting into an entry that really has nothing to do with grammar, but your grammar entries are pretty old.

Ok, my question – I need to be absolutely sure about this, so I need total justification.

Should it be:

May your life be as a song, resounding with the dawn, to sing away the light…

or

May your life be like a song… etc etc.

Purely from a grammar standpoint, wouldn’t “like” be correct, since it’s used as a preposition as opposed to a conjunction?

From a purely auditory sense, like just sounds more right. Both as and like are used in similes, and can both be used as prepositions, according to Meriam Websters dictionary, so technically, both are grammatically correct. But, when it comes down to it, I think the flow and sound of your sentence should win out. If it were me, I’d go with like.

Hope that helps! :)

2 Comments  •  Posted in Ask the Grammar Geek, Grammar

Mar 15, 2007

You know you want to

So, despite my encouraging people to break the rules this week, as the blog says, I really am an anal, control-freak perfectionist. Especially when it comes to good grammar.

I think T’s still bitter at me when we tried to watch The Sum of All Fears, and I kept stopping the DVD to point out how badly worded the opening captions were. And they were awful. The grammar there was so bad, the meaning completely changed. But since T was in for a good spy flick, not a grammar lesson, well… :) (And between my obsessive language rants and T’s pedantic history lessons, our kids are gonna haaaate us one day. hee.)

But anyway, one of the things I notice the most about my stats is that a lot of people find me here with searches “ask grammar” or “grammar rules”. So, who’m I to argue with my stats? Starting tomorrow next week (le sigh), and hopefully weekly, Fridays will be Ask the Grammar Geek day. Got a burning grammar question? Need help? I’m here for you.

You can leave your questions in the comments or email them to me at editorlaurie [at] gmail [dot] com.

3 Comments  •  Posted in Editing, Grammar

Oct 01, 2006

Serial comma done in by serial killer?

I’ve become a fan of the serial comma. I confess, I didn’t use to be, probably for the very same reason most people don’t use it. It’s an extra step, it clutters up the page, and it’s not necessary… Or so I thought.

In my day job, I work to a very strict style guide. One that I’ve been working very hard at memorizing. (The fun part is remembering when I edit romance novels that they don’t need to follow some of the more technical rules. :) ) But in this very strict style guide, the serial comma is mandatory. And, after subscribing to a very popular Canadian women’s magazine, I’m beginning to see the usefulness of the serial comma.

Take this headline:

Meet the new Mrs. Trudeau
On marriage, Margaret and her first year with Justin

Now, the article discusses Sophie Trudeau’s new marriage to Justin and her relationship with her new mother-in-law, Margaret Trudeau. But, if you read the headline, it implies that the new Mrs Trudeau talks about Margaret’s first year with Justin, not her own.

Look at it with the serial comma:

On marriage, Margaret, and her first year with Justin

Ahh, now we’re getting somewhere. That extra comma not only lets us know that it’s Sophie’s year with Justin, not Margaret, it also keeps us from thinking that the ‘her’ in the headline refers to Sophie, not Margaret (which, technically, it still kinda does, since pronouns are supposed to refer to the most recent noun… )

But, I gave this magazine the benefit of the doubt that the comma got dropped somewhere, until I got the next month’s issue. In this issue, we have the headline:

Diana Krall
On marriage, music and becoming a mom

(hmmm. they’re not very creative with their headlines, are they?) But again, our serial comma is missing. Now, in this instance, there isn’t as much confusion as the first one, but it still looks unfinished to me.

So, it seems to me, that one tiny little comma may take up a teeny bit of space in your sentence, but it makes all the world of difference in avoiding confusion.

Leave a Comment  •  Posted in Grammar

Sep 11, 2006

The things that keep me up nights

So, yesterday, for my weekend job, I wrote this headline:

NDP endorse Layton’s call for Afghan pullout

and this teaser:

CP – The NDP has officially become Canada’s first major political party to call for a withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan.

Here’s what’s bugging me. In the headline, NDP is considered plural, so we have endorse, instead of endorses. But then in the teaser, I used NDP as singular, thus the “has.”

So this is wrong. I *know* it’s wrong. And yet, if I change either, it sounds odd to my ear. And I can’t figure out why. I know. Of all the things to fret about? This doesn’t rank that high.

*sigh*

1 Comment  •  Posted in Grammar

Aug 30, 2006

Hello world!

By day, I’m a technical editor, by night, I edit romance novels, and on the weekends, I edit content for a news website. I’ve been known to go on rants about the rampant misuse of the apostrophe, I’ve asked to speak to restaurant managers to point out spelling mistakes in the menu, and I’ve stopped DVDs to point out grammatical errors in the captions.

So before I completely alienate my friends and family with my nitpicky-ness, I thought I’d take my rants to the Web.

So come on in, hang out, rant away. It’ll be fun. Just grammatically correct fun.

1 Comment  •  Posted in Grammar