Lois & Clark Forums Forums Fan Fiction Fanfic Related Grammar and you

That page was a pleasure to read. I have been an obsessive compulsive grammar freak since before I can remember. Of course, I still make careless mistakes sometimes or spell certain words incorrectly, but I can honestly say that I never, ever turn in a paper with poor grammar. The last time I spelled something incorrectly on a formal assignment was probably back in about fourth grade. Also, I refuse to use the internet lingo that some extremely lazy person with way too much spare time invented. It takes all of two seconds to type out "are" instead of "r."

Some of my worst experiences with grammar have come when I am forced to participate in peer editing. I have always found this type of activity to be a complete waste of my time because most of my peers have no idea how to edit my papers. Besides that, I never can actually edit a paper for content when I cannot seem to get beyond grammar mistakes.

I apologize for my little mini-rant, especially because I am so new and I am sure most of you will think I am completely insane, which I can assure you that I am not.
~Lauren

I enjoyed reading the link. However, it made me cringe. I am one of those people who has trouble with spelling and grammar. I do not remember most of the lingo used in this article.

No I am lost!

Analogous, isn't that three colors next to each other on a color wheel?<g>

What the hell is an intransitive verb?

Do I need a lawyer for this?

This made me realize that I don't remember much from my days in Catholic school. Thank God for spell check and beta readers. I always have someone proof read for me. I do not trust myself to understand all the rules of grammar. Unfortunatly, I don't think I will ever get "it". I would be upset, however, if someone thought I was stupid just because I have a hard time with spelling and grammar. My talents are in other things. I managed a 4.0 average at a Masters level and Highest Honors before that.

This is a wake up call for those of us with problems in this area. I need spell check when I am writing on the black board.<g> I emphasize the need to use spell check with my students. Also, I tell my students that they should always have at least two proof readers go over their documents, before they send them out.

The creative process of writing is fun for me, but grammar is pure torture. We need spell check on these threads!

Everyone has their own talent and purpose on this Earth. Judging someone by their flaws does not solve the problem. I think Kathy had the right idea. If someone does it wrong and you know how to do it right, than(crap did I use this correctly?)explain it to them. Maybe they won't make the same mistake twice. Even if they do, maybe they will be more aware of the problem.

Laura, (who still gets confused about affect, effect, then and than even with the explaination.)

What?

Must just say that I've been hanging out on a forum for another fandom lately and I am slowly being driven....even more insane than usual...by the amount of posts that are made using textspeak. I don't even read them any more. It makes my head ache trying to work them out.

Makes me appreciate this forum and you guys all the more, quite frankly. <G>

LabRat

Oh Laura, you might not be perfect with grammar but you definitely have a flair for comedy. Do I need a lawyer for that, indeed!

Well, I'm coming late to this thread, and I started to read through it before going to the links and was caught up short by Wendy's comment
She had the silly face, so I was sure she was kidding, so I went to the link that LauraBF posted. It's very humorous indeed, but obviously I need to know about this rule. The author says:
Seriously, FoLCs, when did this change? I was taught that it was either/or...i.e. Lois's or Lois'. So when I'm GEing I usually give the author a choice, and just make sure they use the same thing consistently throughout. To quote from our own grammar guide on the archive:
And two online grammar guides that I just checked both said that either is acceptable, although one did say that Lois's is preferable.

So when this amusing writer is saying this is the only way it is, she's just talking through her hat here, right?

Kathy

We've had this debate before, Kathy. People seem to get VERY intent on this one. Not sure why. (I do, however, know that Lois' is NOT incorrect! )

Lois' v. Lois's: Last Round

Thanks for the link, Rivka. I was AWOL from the mbs for most of July and there was a lot that I never did get caught up on - this poll was obviously one of those things.

Quoting from Schoolmarm in Rivka's link:
Well, I have found websites that apparently give incorrect information, at least that imply that to me. One is
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation
which gives the example of
Ms Jones' office or Ms. Jones's office.

and another is Prof. Charles Darling\'s Guide to Grammar & Writing
which gives the example of Charles' car and then says Some writers will say that the -s after Charles' is not necessary and that adding only the apostrophe (Charles' car) will suffice to show possession. Consistency is the key here: if you choose not to add the -s after a noun that already ends in s, do so consistently throughout your text. - certainly I agree with the consistency part, which I mentioned in my earlier post...

I have seen both grammar guides recommended by writers here - which is how I discovered the URLs in the first place - and I have found them to be useful resources.

Quite honestly, I don't want to start up a big debate here, but if this is in fact a rule, yet these guides don't seem to include it, how do I know how trustworthy they are about other information?

Kathy

Just before I start World War III, I'm coming back to say that, yes, I was kidding! Mostly. I mean, I use Lois's and prefer it, and have seen more sources saying that it's the only correct form than that either is acceptable.

However... yes, the Archive grammar guide indeed says that, Kathy. I know that without looking at it. How? Because I wrote a chunk of that guide, including the Lois'/Lois's part. So, when I'm GEing or BRing, my practice is exactly as yours: if it's used consistently, I don't question it. After all, regardless of numbers on either side of the argument, it seems that a lot of people have been taught, and have sources to support their belief, that Lois' is equally acceptable.

Now, if we're talking alright or everyday in the sense of 'each day', or alot or definately... let me at 'em! <g>

And, while I'm here, I agree with Marilyn, Laura! You definitely have a talent for humour. But, you know, as far as those grammar terms are concerned - intransitive, non-restrictive clause and so on - I haven't a clue what they mean either. I was never taught English grammar at school. It is possible to learn correct grammar without knowing the technical language to 'explain' it, Laura, so don't give up. You're doing great anyway! Once you begin to learn what's correct, your grammar will improve and it won't matter a cent if you can't explain the difference between a transitive and an intransitive verb anyway.

I've always explained the difference between 'lie' and 'lay' on the basis that the first is something you do to yourself and the second you do to someone or something else - and get your minds out of the gutter! <g> You don't need to understand transitive/intransitive to remember that.

For those who were taught grammar and diagramming sentences and so on, the technical language does help, but for the rest of us it just excludes us, shuts us out of the conversation and makes us feel stupid. You don't need to know lots of technical jargon to use a computer correctly, so why is the technical lingo essential to using correct grammar? IMO, it's not... and there are plenty of people around who can explain or demonstrate correct usage without resorting to the 'techie-speak' of grammar textbooks, including GEs. And including, we hope, the examples shown in the Archive grammar guide. This is not to disparage those among us who are 'fluent' in 'grammar-speak'! - I envy you your knowledge. But when someone is blinded by jargon, as this website does have a tendency to indulge in, it doesn't teach them anything. And, much as I enjoyed the author's rant, I too started to feel my eyes blurring when she got too technical.


Wendy (all for making correct grammar simple <g> )

It seems to me that the growing acceptance of multiple grammatical forms (like Lois'/Lois's, or the fact that the formerly unacceptable use of "hopefully" is now in dictionaries, and a number of other rules that have become less rigid in the past 10-20 years) is likely a consequence of globalization.

It does mean that grammar books printed over 15 years ago, while not necessarily incorrect, are perhaps often more inflexible than more recent editions.

IMO, as long as a writer is clear and consistent, and knows when to use "formal" language (students who used to give me research papers full of slang were shot at dawn! ), it's all good.

I think when it comes to things like Lois'/Lois's we often tend to forget that, just like everything else, grammar and punctuation evolve. Nothing stays the same. Fashions come and go with this as with anything.

I've mentioned before in the past during such discussions that I was unfortunate enough to be taught grammar and punctuation at a time in the sixties when some pretty radical ideas and education experiments were going on.

The idea then was that in ten years we would no longer be writing, we would all be typing. (Yeah, I can't believe that one flew either) Writing would be obsolete. So what was needed was a form of punctuation and grammar which would save typing time. Brilliant plan, huh? Much in the same way that language was adjusted to cut down time when doing shorthand. Same idea.

As a result - just one small example of the madness - I was taught to ignore the difference between it's and its - yeah, cut out that apostrophe, that'll save a couple of seconds. It took me a long time after leaving school to figure out what the difference was and even then much longer to actually do it, since the habit of leaving it out was ingrained in me by then and I was always forgetting. For years I would type something and then have to go back and remember to insert the apostrophe where appropriate.

That's an extreme example of course, but it does illustrate that we're often at the mercy of the 'experts' in deciding what's right and what's not. And that probably in part explains discrepancies like your various grammar guides, Lynn.

LabRat

Friend of mine sent me this:

http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

Laura

Well, Miz Rat, that sounds like a really bad time for learning about writing. I was teaching grammar and punctuation back in the early sixties but not what you described. Even though my grammar books go way way back, I still recognize that the language lives and changes (unlike Latin which I still regard as a thing of beauty even if it is dead). But we do have to have some standards and we ought to be familiar with what is considered the "best" even if we choose not to use it. One of my favorite quotes is from the playwright, Arthur Miller, who said that you have to know the rules in order to break them. The key is in knowing when a choice is appropriate. I'm still an old curmudgeon about some things and willing to be flexible about others. Is there anyone else besides me who still diagrams sentences to determine some usages? Is there anyone who still knows what I mean by 'diagrams a sentence'?

Jude

I've weighed in on the Lois'/Lois's debate before, so I'll just be brief and say I think it's one of those issues that really isn't clear cut anymore and the most important thing is to be consistent. When I first started writing fanfic, I used Lois', if I were to start today or if I were to write an original fiction story using the name Lois, I'd probably use Lois's. But I continue to use Lois' out of habit. I really don't care either way.

To regress to what we were discussing earlier - about the need to write properly if you want people to take you seriously - I had to share this email I got today. This came across on one of my nanny listservs.

No capitalization. No punctuation. And I swear to god, my first reaction was the sarcastic thought, "Yes, I love to refere someone to u." Not to mention the fact that she makes to reference to any prior experience or training. Why in the world would I send any potential work her way?

Now, I'm sure that if I were to point this out to her, she'd say that I was taking it too seriously and that this is just an email and that her ability to write is in no way indicative of her ability to care for children. However, I'd have to disagree on both parts. Because it's not "just an email" it's an email asking for job leads - this listserv is full of potential job contacts for her, and this is her first impression. Secondly, while her ability to spell and write is no way indicative of her ability to love or care for a child, part of a nanny's job is to educate and be a good example. If she can't be bothered to proofread her email looking for a job, why would I refer her to a position where she would be helping children with homework and setting an example? The example she is setting here is that it is okay to be sloppy and lazy. Would it really have taken that much extra time/effort to write this out properly? I mean, it takes a split second longer to write "you" instead of "u". And I'm not asking for diagramming sentences, I'm asking that she use basic punctuation and capitalization.

Actually, on that point, I wanted to respond to this:

You're absolutely right, Laura. The thing is, what makes me irritated or upset is not lack of talent, but lack of effort. It doesn't take talent to run spellcheck. It doesn't take talent to have a proofreader look over your writing. There are a lot of people out there who struggle with grammar (and with writing in general). I don't expect them to love it and learn all the little quirks. I just expect them to make it presentable if they expect me to read it. When I was an editor, I had a writer who was severely dyslexic. He really struggled with writing, and I always admired his determination, even though he was not one of my best writers. I didn't expect his articles to come in flawless. However, I expected him to run spellcheck, just as I expected all my other writers to run spellcheck. I never made fun of any of my writers or acted condescendingly when they made what I thought were stupid errors. In fact, in my evaluations, my writers wrote over and over again that even though I was one of the toughest editors at the paper, they loved working with me because I never spoke down to them or tried to take over their stories. But I had no qualms about refusing to read a story that had glaring errors. There were a number of times that I'd read two paragraphs, get up and say, "Call me back over when you've edited this yourself." After a time or two of that, they knew what was expected.

Most of the errors I deal with on a daily basis (either when I was an editor or just in communication with random people) is not a result of a learning disability, but simply the result of laziness. There is no one out there (over the age of seven) who honestly believes the word you is spelled u. That's just laziness. I don't expect perfection from people, and I don't expect people to know all the technical terms for grammar. I freely admit that I don't know all the technical terms. I just expect people to either know how to do it correctly or find someone who does to edit their writing.

Annie

Yes, I was, of course, referring solely to the UK education system of the time.

And actually, I have no idea how widespread this was. It could have been solely the Scottish education system of the time. Or even a locally based experiment. I have absolutely no idea. The one clear memory I have - other than trying to mercifully forget what I was taught - is of our teacher describing the bright and glorious future where writing was no more and machines did all the work for us.


LabRat

Laura, your link won't open for me.

And while we're talking about spell-checkers, I'm going to tout ieSpell again. I love it!

Aw, come on, I like it in the gutter sometimes.<g>

My sense of humor helps get me through the rough spots.

Thanks for the encouragement Wendy. Before I went to college, I spelled college like knowledge, sure, shure and to too and two were easily overlooked. I learned so much by having to write all those years of papers! Yet when I started to dabble in fanfiction, I made many common errors. There and their is a big one for me. Having beta readers correct my work, really helps me to learn. I still screw up from time to time, as any beta I've had will tell you<g>, however, I do notice an improvement. I try, but some old habits die hard.

Anne, it sound like you know how to deal with people. Compassion is important but you don't need to accept work from someone who doesn't even bother with spell check.

I do remember diagramming sentences in grade school. I had a very mean nun who scared the living crap out of me trying to teach diagramming.
I think I have a mental block because of her. I remember Nomulative and Objective clauses, I think. I didn't understand it all then and I certainly don't understand it now. The one thing I know for sure is that I will never send any writing or document of any importance out without having a few people check it for me first.

Laura

I remember a couple or years ago I spent an entire class arguing with three people about the spelling of the word tomorrow. They thought it was spelled tommorow. All three of them had been living in Canada for at least two years then, and one of them was even an American (and English was her first language), while I was living in Canada for only about six months at the time (maybe I did have an advantage because I had my ESL teacher drill correct spelling into my head everyday ).

When I took out a dictionary and showed them that it was spelled 'tomorrow' they said it must have been a mistake, or a typo, or something. And that was when I gave up my argument and started laughing (even though I should have been crying).

With the kind of people I find myself sharing a class with, I totally agree (see above).

When I came to Canada, I was stuck in an ESL class for little less than a year, and my English was pretty horrible at the beginning, though I could get by. My spelling was even more appalling. For about a whole term, my teacher would have to constantly remind me to capitalize proper nouns and beginning of sentences. I also quickly learned there was an 'e' on the end of 'because'. Maybe because I had a tough teacher is why I watch my grammar so much.

I remember though in Israel, in grade 2, my teacher would give us spelling tests every week, and I'd get a perfect mark on each of them. Maybe my spelling was perfect already then because I read so much (My nick name was 'the bookworm').

Julie (feeling very sorry for the girls mentioned above)

Ugh, diagraming sentances . We didn't learn it in school except for about 3 weeks in eighth grade, but my dad (the gramar enforcer)used to make me do it "for fun" from the time I was a little kid.

Now spelling . . . that's another story. I think I have a mental block on spelling. When I was in 6th grade, I was taking algebra, in 8th grade reading, in the able learners program, but . . . taking 5th grade spelling and barely passing . I don't know. I read a lot as a kid, too. I would devour any and all books I could get my hands on. Yet I couldn't spell.

I have a Master's Degree. I am getting a PhD. I still don't know how to spell. Oh well. I don't think it will do that much harm in the long run . Sometimes people make fun of me when my Matlab codes have consistent spelling mistakes, but that doesn't make my programs not run. Oh well. I like being the brunt of jokes .

- Laura

This is slightly off topic but Lab's comment and my long-held desire to say something has prompted me to speak up:

Speaking of typing...

I learned to type on an old-fashioned carriage typewriter, the kind you had to put two sheets of paper in to protect the roller and the key heads. And I was taught to always put two spaces after a period.

Once I started working in graphic design, it took my Creative Director about two weeks to break me of that habit, and now it is one of my biggest bug-a-boos. Word processors recognize periods and compensate by putting enough space after them that the two spaces are not necessary.

The first thing I do when I GE a story is find and replace all double spacings after periods with one space.

I know it is a really hard habit to break, but if you are a perpetrator of this antiquated habit, I beg you, please, try to stop. If I can convert just one person to see the light, I will have accomplished my mission here on Earth. I thank you from the bottom of my heart <G>.

Whew. I feel so much better. I've been dying to get that off my chest for about four months now. I think I need a shoulder rub. From Clark.

Lynn

Well, by the time I was in middle school (where I took typing class, which by then was called Introduction to Computers), we were using computers with MS Word, and they still taught us two spaces after a period. However, when I started taking journalism classes in college, they taught us to use only one space. In journalism, every space counts, and by eliminating the second space after a period you can squeeze in precious extra words. I get in that habit and it tends to spill over into everything I write. However, I'm pretty sure that most people still expect two spaces after a period in any document that isn't space sensitive. None of my professors or bosses (other than those involved in journalism) ever told us to use one space rather than two. I think it's evolved to the point where either is acceptable, but neither is truly right or wrong. If anything, two spaces is still prefered except in space-sensitive documents.

Annie