Words Between the Spaces

Regrettably vs. Regretfully

2012-02-08T16:51:00.003-05:00

Regrettably means unfortunately.

Regretfully means with regret.

Regrettably he submitted his manuscript; we returned it regretfully.

Sometimes it just works out that way.

"Regrettably, All The Good Paying Jobs Start Before I Get Up." T-shirt available here

How do you become a copy editor?

2012-01-16T13:01:00.006-05:00

Here's a not uncommon question from a reader:

I stumbled upon your blog today while trying to look up insure versus ensure. My question is, how does one get involved in the copy editing field? Is this something you can do from home? I work in a library—if the budget cuts get nasty I want to have some other options available to me.

Good question. It seems every copy editor has a different path to this noble pursuit. Some seem to have been born to it. I took a more circuitous route.

Although I always loved to read—a habit my mother, an avid reader, instilled in me—I never thought I would write or edit words.

My dream was to become a photographer. For years, I seem to have seen the world through my camera—another gift from my mother, for my 16th birthday. I eventually realized my passion for photography was greater than my talent. That's when I switched to words.

Still, I didn't study English or literature or journalism. I studied political economy. After graduate school, I worked in a think tank on a book project. Two of the writers were non-native English speakers. They asked me to clean up their writing before it was sent out for review. I wasn't bad at editing and learned a lot on the job. I took some copy editing classes at the local university and improved my skills.

I later became a reporter and writer. Then an editor. And eventually a copy editor.

My advice to those interested in becoming a copy editor is to find someone to practice on. Edit a friend's writing. (I did this back in the day with my friend Steve, whose writing and spelling were atrocious. Our friendship survived my pedantic editing.) Or volunteer with an organization that puts out a newsletter or has a blog. Get some experience, and see if you even like copyediting. (I'll be honest: It's not glamorous work, though I do find it fulfilling.) Take some classes at the local university. Make some contacts, and see what happens.

That's how I became a copy editor. If you have a story or advice you'd like to share, please post it in the comments.

Copy editor T-shirt available at zazzle.com

Majority are vs. Majority is

2012-01-16T12:33:00.003-05:00

Happy new year! I hope the majority of you are enjoying 2012.

Or is that "majority is enjoying"?

A dear friend who battles with colleagues on grammar asked for clarification recently. Here's what I wrote:

Majority can take a singular or plural verb; it depends on the context. If a group is acting as a whole, then it would be singular, such as "the majority of council members has voted in favor." But if they are acting as individuals, then it would be plural. Such as: "the majority of my readers are enjoying the new year".

"(i) am the new majority" T-shirt available here.

Incentivize vs. Incentives

2011-09-28T17:41:00.006-04:00

If you're the president of the United States, you can get away with using "incentivize."

Speaking about Medicare earlier this week, President Obama said:

So what we’ve said is let’s incentivize providers to do a more efficient job and, over time, we can start reducing those costs.

Yes, incentivize is in the dictionary: to provide with an incentive. Why not just say that, rather than use this ungainly business babble?

How about giving incentives to providers? Or encouraging providers?

I agree with Bryan Garner's description of incentivize as a barbarism. "There is no good incentive to use" the word, he says.

Even if you're the president of the United States.

"Incentivize" T-shirt available at wearmore.net

Rice Paddy Redundant

2011-09-27T15:38:00.003-04:00

You know those annoying guys that know everything about everything? Well, I'm not one of them.

But perhaps even more annoying, I know a little something about a lot of things. It's the nature of my profession: to soak up random facts and tidbits of information. So when a topic comes up in conversation, I can usually–and often do–throw in a factoid. One of my friends actually finds it amusing, not annoying. Go figure.

A recent example: rice paddy. We've all heard the term. But did you know that it's etymologically redundant?

Paddy comes from the Malay word padi, meaning rice. So technically, "rice paddy" means "rice rice."

Rice field or paddy field are preferred where I work. But sometimes we let it stand if it adds "flavor" to a story.

That's your factoid for today.

"Go tend my rice paddy" T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Best Grammar Blog nomination

2011-09-18T12:14:00.005-04:00

Here's a blatant plug. This blog has been nominated for Best Grammar Blog of 2011 by Grammar.net. If you're feeling generous, click on the badge to vote. Thanks.

Update: Thanks for all your support! I'm officially nominated. Voting is taking place until October 17. Click here to enter your vote.

Argos

2011-09-15T14:29:00.005-04:00

You probably know by now that I love words. They inspire me every day, and my livelihood depends on them.

When I decided to adopt my first dog 13 years ago, I had already thought long and hard about what word to name him. He would be called Argos.

In Homer's Odyssey–my all-time favorite book–the loyal and faithful dog Argos is the only one to recognize King Odysseus when he finally returns to his homeland after 20 years. Odysseus had raised Argos as a puppy. During Odysseus's absence, Argos had been neglected, but he remained loyal to his master to the end.

Thirteen years ago I adopted a smart and adorable Labrador retriever puppy and named him Argos. What I didn't know then but learned over time was just how apt his name was. Modern-day Argos was as loyal, faithful, and noble as his ancient namesake. He was my companion and best friend, and I can honestly say that I am a better person today for having had him in my life.

Sadly, my Argos died suddenly last week. Fortunately, he died peacefully in his bed at home and didn't suffer.

For once, words fail me in expressing my sadness over Argos's passing. But his name and memories live on.

That vs. Which

2011-08-30T16:06:00.005-04:00

A recent reader query:

I'm an attorney and I sometimes have trouble deciding when to use "that" and when to use "which" in legal briefs. If you had any insight that would be greatly appreciated.

Good question. These so-called "relative conjunctions" can be a bit hard to master at first, but with a little explanation and experience using them correctly, they quickly become second nature.

First, the technical answer. If you're familiar with grammar rules, it should make sense:

As a general rule the relative conjunction which introduces nonrestrictive clauses; that introduces restrictive clauses.

In lay terms: If dropping the clause would change the meaning, use that without commas.

Examples:

Jokes that are off-color do not belong in the magazine.
This joke, which is off-color, does not belong in the magazine.

I can see where this becomes important in legal briefs, since each one sets up a different category: restrictive (that; one particular case or class of cases) and nonrestrictive (which; supplemental or nonessential information).

Bryan Garner, in his exhaustive and authoritative Garner's Modern American Usage, offers these helpful guidelines:

First, if you cannot omit the clause without changing the basic meaning, the clause is restrictive; use that without a comma. Second, if you can omit the clause without changing the basic meaning, the clause is nonrestrictive; use a comma plus which. Third, if you ever find yourself using a which that doesn't follow a comma (or a preposition), it probably needs to be a that.

I hope that information, which I've gleaned over years of editing, is helpful to you.

"Conjunction Junction School House Rock!" T-shirt available at CrazyDogTshirt.com

Apostrophize II

2011-08-27T16:20:00.003-04:00

A reader who found this blog by searching for "apostrophize" sent the following example of the word's use in "an old McGruffey Reader":

An exchange paper thus apostrophizes on marriage:

Marriage is like a flaming candle light,
Placed in the window on a summer night,
Inviting all the insects of the air
To come and singe their pretty winglets there.
Those that are out butt heads against the pane,
And those within butt to get out again.

The reader, Tom, wrote: "The first comment in your entry for 'apostrophize,' and this selection from the reader, might enhance one's understanding of the meaning of the word. Or at least generate a smile."

It definitely brought a smile to my face. Thanks, Tom!

Wildebeest vs. Wildebeests

2011-08-17T11:15:00.004-04:00

Lions and tigers and wildebeests…

Or is that wildebeest?

I received an email this week from a reader who wondered about the rules for pluralizing animals. He was concerned about the inconsistency in "millions of wildebeest, zebras, and antelope." Here's how I answered:

Don't sweat it too much. The English language is a hodge-podge of words borrowed and adapted from other languages. (For example hodge-podge is a variant of hotchpotch, a word from 1583 that stems from hochepot, an even older Anglo-French word.) That means there's no single answer to plurals for nouns, including animals.

As you know, standard plurals end in "s": cats, dogs, snakes. There are also non-standard plurals that we are all familiar with: deer, mice. Then there are the ones that fall in the middle, such as wildebeest/wildebeests. Both plural forms for wildebeest are acceptable.

How to decide which one to use? In my office we follow the preferred plural form as listed in Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. If the plural is non-standard, then the definition lists the preferred plural first and variants after. In the wildebeest definition, it says: pl wildebeests also wildebeest. So we use wildebeests as the plural. Similarly, we would use antelope for the plural form.

My advice is to choose a dictionary to follow and consistently apply the preferred plural.

"Wildebeest" T-shirt available at RedBubble.com

Staunch vs. Stanch

2011-08-09T13:42:00.005-04:00

Little Edie knows best.

As she spells out in this terrific clip from Grey Gardens, Little Edie is a staunch woman–firm and steadfast.

Stanch is a verb: to stop or check the flow of, as in stanch the bleeding.

This post is dedicated to my dear, staunch friend Andy.

"Staunch" T-shirt available at CafePress.

Dodge That Dangler

2011-07-12T14:22:00.004-04:00

What's wrong with this sentence?

Enticed by reports of the richness of the land, the first three ships...

In a word: dangler.

That's short for dangling modifier, or grammar speak for mismatched subject and verb. In this case, the opening phrase says that the subject, "the first three ships," were "enticed by reports of richness." Of course we know the people onboard were enticed, not the ships themselves. The "dangling" part is the missing intended subject: sailors.

Here's a fix: Sailors on the first three ships were enticed by reports of the richness of the land.

A colleague said the dangler was fine and didn't need fixing, since it was obvious we meant the people in the ships, not the ships themselves.

"Nice try," I replied.

It's not polite to dangle in public.

"Dangling Modifier" T-shirt available at jargonation.com

Dashing off

2011-03-14T20:18:00.003-04:00

I'm dashing off to Phoenix this week for the American Copy Editors Society annual conference.

On Thursday I'll be giving a talk about editing maps and graphics. And on Friday I'm on a panel discussing apps for iPads and other tablets. If you're at the conference, be sure to say hi.

Speaking of dashes, I noticed a pile up of them in the February Vanity Fair article on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and the diplomatic cable dump. Here's the last paragraph:

But convergence goes only so far–there's no reason to think that either party has shed its basic outlook, or ever will, or could. The conflict is as old as civilization itself–between those who cherish what institutions provide and those who distrust everything that institutions stand for. At the moment, in journalism, neither seems to have the upper hand–and neither can do without the other.

At least the writer kept herself to only one dash per sentence. But one dash every sentence is hardly better. Good writers–and editors–know to use dashes sparingly. Otherwise they lose their effect in highlighting a point or making a strong aside. If everything is set off, then nothing stands out.

"Must Dash" T-shirt available at redbubble.com

Fondue vs. Fondant

2011-02-24T15:29:00.006-05:00

It's not often that the misuse of a word leads to a death threat. But that was the case last week in Dorchester, Massachusetts:

A disagreement over the correct use of the word "fondue" led a Dorchester woman to threaten to kill a cake store clerk on Friday, according to Brookline police.

This lede is from the account in the online newspaper Wicked Local Brookline. Apparently, the suspect entered the Party Favors Brookline store and took offense when the clerk corrected her usage of the word "fondue" when she meant "fondant icing." From Wicked Local:

“Fondue, fondant, who gives a f---. You’ve had an attitude the whole time,” Bogues [the suspect] told the employee, according to the police report.

Bogues then allegedly threatened to kill the store clerk. Oh my.

Is this simply a case of you say "fondue," I say "fondant"?

Nope. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed., defines fondant as "a soft creamy preparation of sugar, water, and flavorings that is used as a basis for candies or icings." And as anyone who lived through the 1970s knows, fondue is a dish with melted cheese (or other hot liquid, such as chocolate) that you dip pieces of food into. (Fondue seems to be making a comeback. A dear college friend recently invited me over for a fondue dinner, and in the same week he was invited to his neighbor's place for another fondue party. Coincidence, or hot trend?)

Here's the point of this post: Beware whom you correct. (Notice the "whom" not "who"!) If you upset the wrong person, they might just skip the fondue and try to do you in.

"Fondue me" T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Stigma vs. Stigmata

2011-02-02T13:26:00.006-05:00

It's an occupational hazard for copy editors: feeling superior to everyone who can't spell, can't write clearly, can't get a fact right.

Maybe that's why the profession is often stigmatized. (From stigma, Latin for mark or brand; characterized as disgraceful or ignominious.)

A word of warning to other copy editors: Never underestimate your own ignorance. My recent case in point: stigmata.

On one of the blogs I follow, a reader left a comment and referred to the "stigmata of being gay." I genuinely laughed out loud when I read that. The idea of any of my gay friends bleeding from their hands or suffering from other wounds resembling those of the crucified Jesus was ludicrous.

Then I looked up the word stigmata. It turns out that stigmata is the preferred plural form for stigma in most dictionaries. So the reader was correct in his comment about the stigmata (read, stigmas) of being gay.

I never knew that and always thought the plural was stigmas. That's usually the alternate plural, although Garner's Modern American Usage advises: "The English plural (-mas) is preferable in most contexts."

I agree with Bryan Garner and advise stigmas for the plural form, unless referring to the religious meaning of the word.

Now I'll go back to feeling superior about catching other people's mistakes.

"I'd shake your hand, but I've been having stigmata recently." T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Despaired

2011-01-27T15:12:00.004-05:00

I've been so busy with work that I haven't had time or energy to blog much recently. Sorry about that. But I like to think that the millions of readers of the national magazine I work for are getting the benefit of my hard work.

Wrong.

Our February issue is just out and features a pretty cool cover story and lots more inside. Last night I received the first comment on the issue from a reader. It left me despaired.

No mention whatsoever about how interesting the articles are this month. Not a word on the great writing or terrific photography. Instead, it was a rant on how the word "despaired" in a caption was hyphenated. Because of space constraints, the word broke at the end of a line: despair-ed.

According to this reader's dictionary, despaired is two syllables, not three, and breaks only at de-spaired. The kind reader then signed off with "rules are rules!"

I tried to be kind in my response, saying that dictionaries differ and that rules are usually not rules, but rather traditions, and those can be broken. Blasphemous, I know, but true.

Then I tried to resist despair. So far, it's working.

"Resist Despair" T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Prophecy vs. Prophesy

2011-01-12T12:06:00.004-05:00

Prophecies can be tricky. That's why I tend to avoid them.

But if you can't, then be sure to distinguish between prophecy and prophesy. What's the difference?

Prophecy is a noun–meaning a prediction of something to come–and is pronounced "see" at the end (it rhymes with "look at me").

Prophesy is a verb: to make a prediction. It's pronounced "sigh" at the end (rhymes with "my oh my").

Unfortunately, in a recent article I let slip by "prophesies" where "prophecies" was meant. A keen-eyed Italian reader called me–gingerly, and actually by email–on the mistake.

Mistakes will be made, but I prophesy that I won't let that slip by again. I hope that prophecy comes true.

In the meantime, I wish a very happy new year to all my readers.

"In accordance with the prophecy..." T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Holiday Mondegreens

2010-12-17T10:20:00.006-05:00

"What's a mondegreen?" you ask.

According to Merriam-Webster's online,

it's a word or phrase that results from a mishearing of something said or sung <“very close veins” is a mondegreen for “varicose veins”

Also, the origin of mondegreen:

from the mishearing in a Scottish ballad of “laid him on the green” as “Lady Mondegreen”

Bryan Garner, in Garner's Modern American Usage, gives some wonderful holiday examples:

Many mondegreens are essentially children's misinterpretations. Consider the examples just from the Christmas season. A child sings "Silent Night" in this way: "Holy imbecile, tender and mild." Of course, the actual words are "Holy infant, so tender and mild." In the same song, "Christ the sailor is born" is a mangled version of "Christ, the Savior, is born." And "round yon Virgin" can mistakenly become "round John Virgin." In "The Twelve Days of Christmas," some have interpreted the true love's gift of the first day as being "a part-red gingerbread tree" instead of "a partridge in a pear tree." And in "Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer," some have thought that there's a tenth reindeer: "Olive, the other reindeer" (for "All of the other reindeer").

Happy mondegreen mashing of the season's carols to you all!

"Olive the other reindeer" framed print available at CafePress.com

Eggnog vs. Egg Nog

2010-12-15T09:21:00.004-05:00

File this under: Everyone Needs an Editor.

Note: Sometimes it takes a committee of editors.

I work at a large non-profit organization that has many divisions, each of which produces different content, from magazines to books to maps to games to television shows. There are about 20 of us editors who get together once a month to talk about language usage across the organization. I'm the chair of the committee of these comma jockeys.

Our December meeting is traditionally a party with treats and eggnog. The invitation I sent out said "Holiday Egg Nog Party." None of the committee members said anything about "egg nog" as two words, but one responded that she couldn't attend "the holiday eggnog party."

That editor was graceful in correcting my error without public embarrassment and egg on my face. That's the best kind of editor you can find.

Maybe I made the error because I don't like eggnog. As a friend said the other day, it's like drinking pancake batter--yum.

"Can I refill your eggnog? Get you something to eat? Drive you out to the middle of nowhere and leave you for dead?" T-shirt available at redbubble.com. (Yes, it's really available on a T-shirt. I can't wait to order one for the holidays.)

Hyphen Trouble: Big Ass Fans

2010-12-08T13:41:00.004-05:00

Hyphens can make a big difference.

Consider the ad at right that I saw in a recent issue of The New Yorker.

Glancing at it, I wasn't sure what to make of it, though working through the possible meanings made me laugh:

BIG ass fans? (Note the donkey pictured)
Big ASS fans?
Big ass FANS?
Big fans of asses?
Fans of big asses?

Adding a hyphen would have made the message--and the registered company name--much clearer: Big-Ass Fans. That is, very big fans.

So don't be an ass; add a hyphen when needed.

Incongruous vs Incongruent

2010-11-08T12:45:00.002-05:00

A reader recently wrote:

I'm wondering if you could provide any insight on incongruent vs. incongruous. I've heard many different explanations on how incongruent and incongruous are used differently but have yet to find one I'm satisfied with.

To be honest, I was stumped. A quick check of Webster's Collegiate Dictionary didn't help clarify. So I ordered Garner's Modern American Usage, "the preeminent contemporary guide to effective use of the English language," as it bills itself on the dust jacket. It just came in the mail today.

The entry under incongruous notes, "For the distinction between congruous and congruent, see congruent." Hmm. Flipping to that entry, I read, "these words are largely synonymous--meaning 'in agreement or harmony; appropriate'."

It turns out that incongruous ("not in harmony; unfitting") is "far more common" than congruous. Garner gives the example of "tinkling calls, so incongruous from such gigantic birds."

According to Webster's, incongruent is used in mathematics, such as incongruent triangles.

That said, I believe incongruous and incongruent are synonymous. I've seen them used interchangeably. It comes down to author preference, though incongruous seems to be more commonly used.

I'm not sure if my dear reader will be satisfied with this explanation. But I'm very satisfied to have Garner's Modern American Usage now on my bookshelf.

"Incongruous" T-shirt available at CafePress.com

Redundancy

2010-11-02T09:32:00.004-04:00

Talk about redundant. In Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, "redundancy" is defined as "the quality or state of being redundant." While "redundant" means "characterized by similarity or repetition."

Redundancies are common in our language. Think of "free gift" or "general consensus." They are so ubiquitous that we don't even stop to think that all gifts, by definition, are free. Or that a consensus is reached by general agreement of the group. True fact! (If it's a fact, then it's true.)

I try to eliminate redundancies in texts I edit. Two recent examples, in the same 500-word article: "protective helmets" and "military soldiers." Surprisingly, the author balked at my deleting "military" before "soldiers." She thought we needed it for clarity. Yet the context was clear we meant military, as opposed to, say, Christian soldiers.

Do you have any favorite redundancies? Put them in the comments and maybe we can get a consensus of opinion.

"Department of Redundancy Department" T-shirt available at PrankPlace.com

Tick vs Tic

2010-11-01T08:38:00.005-04:00

File this under "Everyone Needs an Editor."

In my recent post on Vacation vs Holiday, I referred to my "British language lapses and ticks." As an anonymous commenter pointed out, that should have been "tics." Webster's Collegiate Dictionary makes that clear:

a frequent usually unconscious quirk of behavior or speech <"you know" is a verbal tic>

You know, I knew that. I just forgot. That's why everyone needs an editor.

In the future, I'll remember that "ticks suck." And so does making such a silly error.

"Ticks Suck!" T-shirt available at CafePress.com

Dreamed vs Dreamt

2010-10-15T11:45:00.007-04:00

Susan Boyle famously sang "I Dreamed a Dream,"--the title of which is annoyingly redundant to my ear. But a self-confessed "fan" of this blog recently asked whether that "dreamed" should be "dreamt."

Natalie wrote, "I never know which to use, and I usually fall back on 'dreamed' because it sounds more comfortable. But it is bothersome to me that I do not know if it is right or wrong."

Thanks for asking, Natalie. I don't profess to know what's right or wrong, but I do have an opinion--and usually back that up with sources. In this case I consulted Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, as well as several dictionaries.

According to WDEU, the verb "dream" has two past and past participle forms: "dreamt" and "dreamed," both of which are nearly 700 years old. That leaves plenty of time for confusion.

Generally, "dreamt" is more commonly used in British English (Susan Boyle notwithstanding), while "dreamed" is more common in the U.S. That said, WDEU acknowledges that "our evidence finds both forms flourishing in American use."

So both forms are correct, but all the American dictionaries I consulted list "dreamed" as the preferred form. That's probably why "dreamed" feels more comfortable for Natalie. And that's what I use when I'm writing and editing.

Still, there's a question nagging at me: Susan can sing "I Dreamed a Dream," but, really, must she?

"I Dreamed a Dream: Susan Can Sing" T-shirt available at kaboodle.com

People vs Persons

2010-10-14T10:32:00.007-04:00

Today's pop quiz:

What's wrong with this sentence?

About three-quarters of people with serious mental illness also have a chronic physical health problem.

The headline for this post should give you a clue. But beware--it's a trick question.

The author of the sentence, a dear friend and "not-so-secret admirer," is a very successful writer with decades of experience. She recently told me that the editor for the article in which this sentence appears insisted that "people" was incorrect and should be changed to "persons." My friend's plaintive plea: Is that true?!

Nope. The sentence is fine as written. Don't tell that to some fine old traditionalists, however. There's an outdated style "rule" that maintains "persons" should always be used with numerical designators, in this case, three-quarters. But that was discarded decades ago, and style manuals I use indicate that "people" is acceptable in all cases.

To get around the bureaucratic-sounding "persons," my friend used "individuals" instead. Given the subject matter, it was probably best not to annoy the insistent crazy person.

"Don't annoy the crazy person" T-shirt available at DressWicked.com

Reach out to...

2010-10-06T08:10:00.006-04:00

"Who do I reach out to?" a colleague asked in a recent email.

I had to restrain my fingers from cyber-strangling her on two counts: using the bureaucratese "reach out to," and incorrectly using "who" instead of "whom."

What's with this reaching out to? I really don't want anyone reaching out to me. It sounds too cuddly and new-worldy. Whatever happened to contacting or calling or writing or reaching someone?

On that front, I'm not going to reach out to you, but do I want to thank all my readers for their interest in this blog. Who knew that people still care about words and how to use them? Obviously there are a lot of you, and that warms my cranky, copy editor heart. I especially appreciate your comments, observations, and queries. You're the best. (Look who's getting all cuddly now.)

"You Should Blog This" T-shirt available at ATshirtBlog.com

Vacation vs Holiday

2010-09-29T13:35:00.008-04:00

Has it really been more than a month since my last post?

Can it already be fall and summer is but a memory?

Summer is gone, but at least I have fond memories of summer vacations. Yes, plural--lucky me.

I spent a week on Cape Cod, then later left for a week in Provence. Staying at a simple hotel near Beaumes de Venise, I met a delightful English couple who themselves were on holiday.

Vacation vs holiday: yet another difference that divides Yanks from Brits. I went to graduate school in London and had to live with those language differences. Depending on the circumstance, it was challenging, annoying, or just different and fun.

When I returned to the States, though, my British language lapses and tics were merely annoying to my friends and family. Did I really have to go to the loo, friends would ask, their eyes rolling. I quickly took their disdain to heart and shaped up to State-side English.

That's all to say that I'm back, and I hope to blog more regularly now. Sorry for the lapse, but I am happy to report that my holidays were bloody smashing jolly!

(Thanks to @rottrover for asking!)

"Don't Bother Me I,m On Vacation!" T-shirt available at Zazzle.com

Nauseous vs Nauseated

2010-08-08T20:37:00.005-04:00

I was talking with a colleague last week, when she suddenly felt nauseous. Her face went pale, and she looked shaken. I tend to have that kind of effect on people.

When I apologized for upsetting her, she said it wasn't me, she had just suddenly felt nauseous. And not missing a beat, the editor in her asked, “Or is that nauseated?"

Good question. When we recently described how a scuba diver could “feel nauseous from oxygen deprivation,” we received several responses. One terse letter included the page ripped from the magazine with the word “nauseous” circled and a succinct, hand-written note: “Do better!”

The dear correspondent was holding on to the traditional distinction between nauseated, meaning affected with nausea, and nauseous, meaning causing nausea. So traditionalists would say that my colleague felt nauseated, perhaps caused by my nauseous behavior.

Not so fast, traditionalists. Using nauseous to mean affected with nausea is so common today, that most dictionaries not only accept that usage but argue in favor of it. From the usage note in Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11^th edition:

Those who insist that nauseous can properly be used only in sense 1 [causing nausea] and that in sense 2 [affected with nausea] it is an error for nauseated are mistaken. Current evidence shows these facts: nauseous is most frequently used to mean physically affected with nausea, usually after a linking verb such as feel or become

Are you feeling nauseous yet?

"I'm nauseous" T-shirt available at Cafe Press.

Douche bag vs Douchebag

2010-07-26T17:05:00.009-04:00

According to former copy editor Lori Fradkin, "The word is douche bag. Douche space bag." Fradkin gives this advice in her wickedly entertaining article "What It's Really Like To Be a Copy Editor." It's worth a read for her funny insights into, well, what it's really like to be a copy editor.

I was going to post on Fradkin's article last week, but then I got too busy and it was so darn hot and I didn't get around to it. I'm glad I waited, because yesterday I found a very interesting take on Fradkin's article.

On The Economist's language blog, called Johnson, R.L.G. offers a retort titled "What it's really like to be copy-edited." The author recently had a book of his copyedited and "was eager to see what Ms Fradkin had to say about the other side of this relationship," that is, the copy editor's perspective. (On the use of hyphens and period in this paragraph, see below.)

Though he found Fradkin's article entertaining, R.L.G., without exactly calling her a douche bag, criticizes Fradkin's "attitude" that "this is Wrong, because the Dictionary says so," which, he says, "is all too common among copy editors, and is irritating for reasons that bear some explaining." What's worse, he says, is that her approach to the nuances of language is "not interesting."

R.L.G. explains his reproach with an illuminating passage on a much contested aspect of writing, and copyediting: the use of hyphens. As a copy editor, I can tell you that this is the most time-consuming and least gratifying aspect of my job. Everyone has an opinion on hyphenation, and those opinions rarely coincide.

That's why it's best to follow a house style. R.L.G. says The Economist's style manual entry on hyphenation is nine pages long. That's not atypical. It's also a lot to remember, as well as to keep straight and to apply to all copy at all times. And when you're working on deadline, it's sometimes easiest to rely on a house dictionary, as Fradkin did with douche bag. (Book deadlines tend to be more forgiving than newspaper or magazine deadlines, allowing more room for give and take between author and copy editor.)

It's unfortunate that R.L.G. has found copy editors commonly irritating. Yes, we can be irritating. But isn't that the case with any editor who's asking you to change your pearls of prose and impeccable wrting?

I'm a former reporter and writer, and I remember being irritated on many occasions by pesky copy editors who asked for clarity and parallel construction in my sentences and articles. What I didn't see or acknowledge were the many instances where copy editors corrected my misspellings and poor grammar. (And looking back, I wish I had had more pesky and intelligent copy editors who would have caught some egregious mistakes I made in my writing.)

On another note, R.L.G. mentions, and quickly dismisses, "the tired prescriptivist-descriptivist debate." I've been thinking a lot about that topic and will post on that debate in the future.

But getting back to house style, in his article R.L.G. uses The Economist's style of excluding the period in Ms--isn't that clearly wrong? Like the New York Times, The Economist uses Mr. and Ms. before surnames. But The Economist idiosyncratically omits the period. It's clearly wrong. But it's also clearly permissible. It's a matter of style, as is using a hyphen in copy-edit, whereas I close up the word: copyedit. Neither is wrong; each is a matter of house style.

Keep that in mind before you call someone a douche bag, or douchebag, or worse, uninteresting.

"I'm not a douche bag" bag available is available at CafePress.com.

Reign vs Rein

2010-07-21T11:51:00.005-04:00

Does spelling still matter? To many of my readers, it does.

My dear friend Pearl, a loyal follower of this blog, recently wrote to ask about the word "reign" in the following sentence:

This new law will reign in Wall Street abuses, end government bailouts, and give everyday Americans the consumer protection they deserve and expect.

Pearl knew that "rein in" was correct here, as in pulling the reins on a horse, not a monarch reigning over people. (Pearl, a real queen herself, knows between royalty and horses!) But a colleague of hers insisted that "reign" was correct. And the colleague had backup, citing Robert Klose's 2007 article in the Christian Science Monitor titled "Reign in those vocal chords."

Problem is that the backup doesn't back up the use of "reign in." Rather, Klose argues that just because one dictionary publisher (Oxford University Press) says it's OK to "have it your way" with spelling, there are standards that fogies like Klose--and me, and Pearl, as well as the majority of dictionaries and style books--still adhere to.

To Pearl's colleague, I say: Rein in that urge to lower your standards; proper spelling reigns supreme.

"Can't Stop the Reign" T-shirt available from Bellargo Piarge Couture.

Soccer vs Football

2010-07-06T08:15:00.006-04:00

Even for non-professional-sports fans like myself, I seem to have come down with something approaching Soccer Fever. (Fortunately, since the World Cup comes around only every four years, there's no need for an immunization.) Last Saturday I actually sat down and watched Germany pummel Argentina in the World Cup quarter-finals.

Then, at a Fourth of July party, a friend was explaining the origin of the word "soccer," what everyone else around the world calls "football." He said it had something to do with the abbreviation of "assoc" and the Anglo tendency to add "er" to words.

Sure enough, in this week's New Yorker, Hendrick Hertzberg explains the word's origin:

"Soccer," by the way, is not some Yankee neologism but a word of impeccably British origin. It owes its coinage to a domestic rival, rugby, whose proponents were fighting a losing battle over the football brand around the time that we were preoccupied with a more sanguinary civil war. Rugby's nickname was (and is) rugger, and its players are called ruggers--a bit of upper-class twittery, as in "champers," for champagne, or "preggers," for enceinte. "Soccer" is rugger's equivalent in Oxbridge-speak. The "soc" part is short for "assoc," which is short for "association," as in "association football," the rules of which were codified in 1863 by the all-powerful Football Association, or FA--the FA being to the U.K. what the NFL, the NBA, and MLB are to the U.S.

And now the quadrennial question: Why don't Americans, like the rest of the world, love soccer? I'll answer that with another question: Why doesn't the rest of the world love American football?

I suddenly feel my fever breaking, and will now get back to work and previously scheduled reading.

Soccer/football T-shirt pictured is available at Objectivo.com.

Y H & O S

2010-05-21T09:21:00.004-04:00

Here's a tip for anyone applying for a job: Formality still counts for something.

There's a job opening where I work, and I've received dozens of resumes submitted online through our website. One applicant ended the cover letter with:

y h & o s

I immediately thought, WTF? What does "yh&os" stand for? More to the point, why would someone sign a cover letter for a job application using something so unfamiliar and informal?

Eventually I figured out that it's short for: "your humble & obedient servant."

OK, so the applicant caught my attention. Obviously he was trying to be clever and playful. Those are good qualities in an applicant and eventual colleague. But so is judgment. Knowing when to use formal language, and when not to, is important in writing and copy editing.

Here are some other general tips for job applicants:

Read the job posting thoroughly; if you don't meet the job requirements, don't apply
Include a short cover letter outlining why you are interested in the position and your relevant experience
Keep your resume short and concise; no longer than two pages
Include an email address in your contact information
Proofread your cover letter and resume; better yet, ask someone else to read it (we all need editors)

Good luck,

YH&OS

("Misc." T-shirt pictured is available at Zazzle.com.)

Dove vs Dived

2010-05-04T16:04:00.003-04:00

I'll never forget my greatest belly flop.

I was about ten years old and visiting family friends in San Diego. I grew up in Southern California and knew my way around pools and diving boards. So when we went to the local public pool and I was dared to dive from the three-meter board, I quickly clambered up the ladder and made my way to the edge.

That's when I got scared--three meters (nearly ten feet) is pretty high for a ten-year-old. But it was my first time that high, it was a dare, and I had to do it.

Wrong decision. I froze up, and when I finally dove, I belly flopped. It was the most excruciating pain I had ever felt--even more painful than when my older brother swung a golf club and struck me in the head, but that's a different story.

Correction: Make that "when I finally dived..." As one grammar stickler pointed out to me early in my copyediting career, "dove" is a bird; "dived" is the past tense for dive.

This is the type of correction grammar sticklers love. When I see "dove" meaning the past tense, I dutifully change it to "dived." I don't think I'll ever forget the difference, just as I'll never forget my greatest belly flop.

("I Dive" T-shirt pictured is available here.)

Talk Wordy to Me, Baby

2010-04-25T21:36:00.004-04:00

One of my favorite blogs, Talk Wordy to Me, is selling T-shirts of his cool logo. (Words and T-shirts, I'm so there.)

Brian White, the wordsmith behind Talk Wordy, is a copy editor, and all proceeds go to the ACES Education Fund, which gives scholarships to college students interested in careers in copy editing.

What's not to like? Cool T-shirt and a good cause. Show your love!

(Talk Wordy T-shirt pictured available at Zazzle.com)

ACES 2010

2010-04-15T09:06:00.003-04:00

A dear colleague recently shared this "Lede of the Day," from The Economist, natch:

WILLI JARANT was getting ready to board a flight from Liverpool's John Lennon airport to his home in Germany when airport employees noticed something was a bit off. As it turns out, Mr Jarant, 91, had already departed: he was dead.

No, I'm not dead, but I will be departing soon for the American Copy Editors Society 2010 conference in Philadelphia. I'm looking forward catching up with colleagues from around the country and making new friends. I'll also be speaking about copyediting for magazines on Saturday afternoon.

I hope to see you in Philly!

(ACES t-shirt available at CafePress.com)

Censer vs Censor

2010-04-05T12:46:00.007-04:00

Yesterday my niece was the thurifer at Easter Mass in her local Roman Catholic Church.

Given the scandals rocking the church lately, I hesitated to ask my sister what, exactly, that meant, and whether it was good or bad.

"She was nervous," my sister said.

Uh oh.

"But she handled the incense perfectly."

Thurifer: "one who carries a censer in a liturgical service," according to Werriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary. The dictionary notes that thurifer is a Latin word, meaning "incense-bearing." The English words thurifer and thurible, a synonym for censer, are thus related.

(This reminds me of Tallulah Bankhead's famous line at high mass: When a frocked priest carrying a censer passed down the aisle, she reportedly said, "Love your dress, dear, but your purse is on fire.")

Note censer (i.e., "a vessel for burning incense; especially: a covered incense burner swung on chains in a religious ritual,"), not censor, as in "a person who supervises conduct and morals."

Perhaps the church could use more of the latter and ditch some of the pomp of the former.

(T-shirt with stained-glass art censer/thurible is available at Zazzle.com.)

Taciturn/Tacit

2010-03-24T12:47:00.003-04:00

Over the weekend I spent some time with a dear friend and former colleague. In one of our long, rambling conversations, thoughts ricocheting off each other in every direction, she mispronounced "taciturn" as "taxi-turn."

Since we happened to be walking along the streets of Glasgow, I immediately looked for a turning taxi. (Like our conversation, traffic seemed to be veering off in all directions, especially since the cars were driving on the "wrong" side of the road.)

The conversation took another turn, and I lost the opportunity to correct her mispronunciation. (That's what friends do, isn't it?) Later I began to wonder if I had gotten it wrong all these years. Was I mispronouncing "taciturn," like when I once said to a friend that something or other had gone "ah-ree" (awry)? Naw, I had it right, I figured.

I didn't think about it again until last night, when "taciturn" (that is, temperamentally disinclined to talk) turned up in Daniel Mendelsohn's memoir The Elusive Embrace. A couple of pages later, he used the word "tacit." Then it struck me: Are taciturn and tacit related?

My feeble brain never made the connection, but they are related, and come from similar Latin words: tacitus (tacit) and taciturnus (taciturn); tacit meaning: expressed or carried on without words. Silence. I get it now.

Though I wasn't taciturn, you could say that our conversation had continued with my tacit approval of her pronunciation.

(T-shirt pictured above, but not the seemingly taciturn model, available at Zazzle.com)

Eager vs Eagar

2010-03-15T16:16:00.006-04:00

A lot of eager readers write in to the publication where I work. We publish some of their comments each month.

I was surprised to see in an upcoming issue comments from someone in Eager, Arizona.

Um, make that Eagar, Arizona's "winter playground," according to the city's website.

I was so eager to move the file on that I didn't spot the mistake. But an eagle-eyed proofreader caught it.

Now I know better. And so do you!

(T-shirt pictured available at Zazzle.com)

What's a limn, Part III

2010-03-01T14:01:00.005-05:00

"Limn" seems to be a book reviewer's best friend. (See my first post on this topic.) At least that's the case for New York Times book reviewer Michiko Kakutani.

Back in November 2002, New York magazine's Matt Gross called Kakutani out on her overuse of "limn" (see "One Life to Limn by Michiko Kakutani"--great head, by the way).

Searching on the NYT website, I found seven more "limns" in Kakutani's reviews since then, though she keeps them to about one a year these days. Most recently, Kakutani wrote on January 28, 2010, that "Mr. Salinger was able to empathetically limn the nooks and crannies of his youthful narrator's psyches..."

Thanks to my dear colleague Jane (whose creative mind mushed lime and rim to come up with another definition of "limn": to wet the rim of a margarita glass with lime juice) for bringing this alarming limn trend to my attention.

Principal vs principle

2010-02-23T15:50:00.005-05:00

This may come as a surprise to some, but a lot of writers can't spell worth beens [sic].

Flannery O'Connor, one of the greatest American writers of the 20th century, described herself as "an innocent speller." She barely passed spelling in school. Certainly there's no malice intended, it's just not a skill some writers possess.

One of my favorite writers--and colleagues--is a poor speller. I don't mind a bit, though. She's so gifted at her craft, that I love everything she writes. And her bad spelling affords me job security.

But I do have to pay special attention to her spelling. This came in recently:

"The principle researcher for the study..."

Make that principal, as in the lead researcher.

Usage here can be confusing. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary has the following unhelpful note:

Although nearly every handbook and many dictionaries warn against confusing principle and principal, many people still do. Principle is only a noun; principal is both adjective and noun. If you are unsure which noun you want, read the definitions in this dictionary.

Principal often means the head of a school, so some think of the Principal as your "pal." (Where did they go to school?) Principals lead schools, so it makes sense they would also lead research or study groups or be the main item on a list. Principal also refers to the amount of a loan that draws interest.

Principles are generally rules, doctrines, or precepts, as in the principles of mathematics. One also hears of the fundamental principles of human rights, for instance.

Principal misspellers haven't mastered the principles of spelling, that's all.

Comma Comment

2010-02-16T15:13:00.006-05:00

Commas can be quite controversial.

Some copy editors like lots of them. Others, like myself, try to keep them to a minimum. So I was delighted to receive the following note today from one of my favorite authors:

"I love the way you don't sprinkle commas over everything like pepper."

That warms my punctuated heart.

(T-shirt pictured available at Zazzle.com)

Of Dogs and Snow

2010-02-10T17:08:00.001-05:00

Sorry that the weather and pictures of pups have taken over this blog lately. That's not my intention, it just shows my preoccupations this past week.

Here's the last picture of Argos I will post. It's in Logan Circle, taken on Wednesday, February 10, 2010.

What's a limn? Part II

2010-02-10T16:37:00.004-05:00

Leave it to The New Yorker.

I was catching up on some recent issues yesterday and read Peter Schjeldahl's terrific review of the Bronzino exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. ("Then and Now," February 1, 2010, The New Yorker.)

Schjeldahl is a wonderful writer whose prose remains accessible while giving glimpses of his genius. Since he writes about the art world, it makes complete sense for him to use the word "limn." (See this previous posting for a definition.)

Sure enough, about three-quarters of the way through his article, talking about the Italian Mannerist Bronzino's drawings on paper, Schjeldahl writes:

A telltale feature is the thin, continuous line that contours his figures, divorcing them from the negative space of the paper: they were limned to be integrated elsewhere.

This is a case of the right word for the right subject by the right writer. My hat is off to Schjeldahl.

(Cover image copyright The New Yorker)

Snowpocalypse

2010-02-10T16:16:00.004-05:00

You know the saying, "Second verse same as the first."

Yet on the heels of Snowmageddon comes Snowpocalypse, a second verse even worse than the first.

The storm that hit the mid-Atlantic region last night and is heading north is worse than the storm over the weekend. We're experiencing blizzard conditions outside, and the snow has piled on another foot or so on top some two feet of accumulated snow.

Other names for this winter of discombobulation are SnOMG, Snowtorious, Snoverkill, Snozilla, and Snofecta.

That's S'now joke.

(Photo of Logan Circle, Washington, DC, taken on February 10, 2010)

Snomageddon

2010-02-08T13:22:00.003-05:00

They predicted a huge snowstorm and it arrived. That's the surprising part of this week's historic storm that struck the mid-Atlantic region. Everything else played out in slow-mo on the news, radio, and online.

When it started snowing Friday afternoon, the streets were nearly vacant, since the federal government closed early and most schools in the D.C. region didn't bother opening in dreadful anticipation of "Snowmageddon"--the blizzard of 2010. The snow didn't stop for 24 hours, and by the end, more than 20 inches had fallen. Schools and the federal government are closed today. Metro and buses are on limited schedules. Cars are buried in snow. It'll take a long time to dig out, and more snow is on the way.

This time the hype was real: Snowmageddon struck hard. I'll enjoy it while it lasts.

(Photo of Logan Circle, Washington, DC, taken Sunday, February 7, 2010)

What's a limn?

2010-02-03T08:39:00.005-05:00

One of my first published articles in U.S. News & World Report, where I was a financial reporter, was a book review.

I don't recall the book. In fact, the only thing I do recall is the word "limn" that the editor inserted into my pristine prose. (As a young writer, I believed my prose was pristine. I'm sure if I dug that clip out and a copy of what I submitted to the editor, I'd see how much he improved it.)

When I read the edited copy, I asked, "What's a 'limn'?" I knew it was a verb, since the passage read, "the book limns the experiences of a financial analyst caught in the vice grip of corruption" or some such purple prose of majesty. At that point in my career, I considered myself a wordsmith and was surprised I hadn't run into that before.

To limn, I soon learned, is "to draw or paint on a surface; to outline in clear sharp detail: delineate; describe," according to Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. The word comes from Latin illuminare, to illuminate.

Even then, I thought it was a pretentious, ten-dollar word when "tell," a perfectly clear Anglo-Saxon word, worked just as well. I queried the editor and was rebuffed. When I complained to colleagues, they said "limn" was one of the editor's favorite words and that he often inserted it into book reviews. It seemed he was on a mission to spread "limn" far and wide. I wasn't convinced.

As I limn this experience, I can tell you that more than a decade later, this is the first time I've used that word in my writing. It's likely the last time, too.

(Image of rug, above, from Limn.com, an interior design studio and art gallery in San Francisco)

Snow Day

2010-01-31T13:38:00.002-05:00

Saturday, January 30. Logan Circle, Washington, D.C.

Okay vs OK

2010-01-13T15:51:00.006-05:00

Okay, are you ready for your world to be rocked?

Most sources say the correct form is OK, and sometimes O.K. (as at the New Yorker and the New York Times). That's because the term originated in 1839 as the abbreviation for "oll korrect," the facetious alternative for "all correct." (Those crazy 19th-century cats!)

So "okay" is not OK. Except when it is okay. Calling it "the most successful Americanism ever--perhaps the best-known word on the planet," Bryan Garner writes in Garner's Modern American Usage:

"okay" has an advantage in edited English: it more easily lends itself to cognate forms such as "okays," "okayer," "okaying," and "okayed." The term is a casualism in any event, but "okay" is slightly more dressed up than "OK."

Don't tell that to the Associated Press, though. Its style book prefers "OK, Ok'd, OK'ing, OKs. Do not use okay." And the New York Times manual advises: "O.K., not okay... Do not use O.K. as a verb except in a direct quotation (O.K.'s; O.K.'d; O.K.'ing)." To my eye, all those periods and apostrophes look not OK; I prefer no periods, as does Merriam-Webster's.

The long of it is that the short form "OK" is preferred. That okay with you?

(T-shirt pictured available here.)

T-shirt of the Day, III

2009-12-30T08:00:00.000-05:00

It's true, I do this all day long. It's very tiring but strangely satisfying.

Happy new year to all!

T-shirt is available from zazzle.com.

T-shirt of the Day, II

2009-12-29T08:00:00.001-05:00

Who could resist such a fun pun?

It's available from One Horse Shy, whose tagline line is, "We ponder to everyone!"

T-shirt of the Day, I

2009-12-28T14:40:00.003-05:00

Save the kittens; use good grammar.

Bonus: The back of this shirt reads, "I judge you when you use poor grammar."

It's available at cafepress.com.

Word of the Year: Craptastic

2009-12-24T09:31:00.005-05:00

I hereby second John McIntyre's "another damn word of the year, word of the decade": craptastic.

(Wordnik.com also lists craptasticularific. How craptastic is that?)

Here's wishing everyone a decidedly uncraptastic holiday season!

(T-shirt pictured from Craptastic.com--yep, there's a website--is available here.)

A Word on Wordnik.com

2009-12-23T13:04:00.003-05:00

Since William Safire's passing this year, there's been a gaping hole in the New York Times Magazine's language column. Ben Zimmer has been the most frequent contributor, and his columns range from zany to real zingers.

A new voice was introduced on Sunday: Erin McKean, the noted lexicographer and Dictionary Evangelist blogger.

If you want to learn how to not annoy lexicographers, her "Redefining Definition" column is a must-read. You'll also get some insight into her latest project, the online dictionary Wordnik.com. It's worth checking out, and even signing up for the Word of the Day: frumenty--"noun, hulled wheat boiled in milk and flavored with sugar and spices"--is today's tasty treat.

Jerrican vs Jerry Can

2009-12-22T11:21:00.003-05:00

Did you know that "Jerry" is offensive?

(Apologies to my friends named Jerry, but I couldn't resist that lead.)

OK, so Jerry isn't offensive. But the word "jerry," derogatory British slang for German soldiers, is considered offensive. Jerry was coined during World War I and used throughout WWII as well. That's so last century; haven't we moved on?

Plenty of folks still consider Jerry a slur and avoid such terms as jerry-built (meaning hastily constructed, but the word apparently pre-dates British slang for German soldiers) and jerry can (a narrow, flat-sided container for liquids, especially gasoline; etymology is Jerry + can, due to German design). That makes me wonder what the Jerrys, er, Germans call these containers.

The commonly accepted spelling is jerrican. Less colorful, alas. And so 21st century.

(Modern "jerry can"--their spelling, not mine--pictured available at Blitzusa.com)

Voodoo vs Vodou

2009-12-21T11:40:00.007-05:00

It was OK for Cole Porter in "You Do Something to Me" to write: "You do that voodoo that you do so well."

That was in 1929; in 2009 "voodoo" is considered offensive.

That's the party line. But Porter's use of voodoo is a clever rhyming device. (How else to explain the rather silly sentence?) Offense is taken when "voodoo" is used to describe the African-derived religious practices and beliefs. Voodoo as a derogatory word derived from the time of U.S. occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934.

As Harold Courlander has noted, "Properly used [the word 'voodoo'] specifies the black magic, witchcraft, mojos, greegrees, love potions, hate potions, etc. that once existed (and possibly to some extent still do) in the American South among blacks and whites alike."

That is in contrast to the religion Vodou (also spelled Vodoun, Vodun, or Vodu) practiced today--mostly in Haiti and in parts of the U.S. (The Washington Examiner ran a recent Q&A, "How the Voodoo Do It," with a Vodoun mambo. Note the offensive voodoo in the title; old practices and words are hard to give up.)

So go ahead and do that voodoo that you do so well, just don't confuse it with the religion.

Dec. 23 Addendum

The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage makes an interesting distinction: "voodoo is a religion with many followers in Africa and the West Indies, not to mention the United States. They are offended by disparaging uses of voodoo to mean irrational beliefs."

It's not the spelling of voodoo. It's the disparaging use of the word denoting the religion that's considered offensive. Consider the difference with Gypsy versus Roma. They are two distinct words, the first considered offensive, the second the accepted for the itinerant peoples mostly in southern Europe. Voodoo is a corruption of vodou, but is it really offensive? I'm not convinced.

("Déja Voodoo" T-shirt is available at Zazzle.com.)

No Regrets

2009-12-17T20:21:00.008-05:00

And so, the Correction of the Year, proclaimed by Regret the Error, in this horrible one for print media (which is hemorrhaging jobs at an alarming rate), was perpetrated by the Washington Post:

A Nov. 26 article in the District edition of Local Living incorrectly said a Public Enemy song declared 9/11 a joke. The song refers to 911, the emergency phone number.

Enough digital ink has been spilled on this reported error by a culturally ignorant copy editor, who seemingly didn't know Public Enemy's 911 song, and the paper's two-week stonewalling. Yeah, well, whatever.

This morning I met with a wonderful coterie of copy editors, current and retired, who have upheld the highest standards in print, online, and even in broadcast television and films. We discussed the pros and cons of jerrican versus jerry can, if you can believe that.

Also this morning, Garrison Keillor on NPR spoke about this year's regretful passing of William Safire, and his advice "to never split infinitives" and "in the end, avoid clichés like the plague."

Language is a splendiferous thing. I'm delighted to spend my days parsing language, and sharing with you.

(T-shirt pictured available at Zazzle.com)

Annus Erroneous

2009-12-17T14:49:00.005-05:00

I feel for Morrissey. The folks at New Music Tipsheet have turned the singer's disastrous year into an unfortunate error. Make that "Annus Horribilis."

Thanks to keen-eyed, and well-heeled and made up, Apocalyspstick Now for the postus hilarious!

Cleanup Efforts at the NYT

2009-12-15T16:19:00.006-05:00

The blogosphere is a wonderfully wily world. From today's After Deadline column comes this cleanup effort of a recent New York Times blog post:

Oil Sands Clean-Up Efforts Criticized
Pembina oil sands analyst Simon Dyer said in a release that it is “troubling” that most producers don’t appear to be moving towards compliance.
Many style errors in this blog post. “Cleanup” should not have a hyphen. “Pembina oil sands analyst” is a false title (make it “Simon Dyer, a Pembina oil sands analyst”). Proper sequence of tenses calls for “was” and “did not” after the past-tense “said.” And it should be “toward,” not “towards.”

It's probably a losing battle to impose high standards online, but I applaud the editors for their valiant efforts.

See also the discussion at the top of the column about plural verbs with the phrase "one of those," as in: "He is one of those bloggers who refuse to accept grammatical mistakes."

Colloquially, one wants to use a singular verb with "He is one," e.g., refuses. Grammatically, the plural verb is correct. Turn the phrase around and it becomes clear: Of those bloggers who refuse to accept grammatical mistakes, he is one.

(Pictured T-shirt available at Zazzle.com)

Stickers for Grammar Sticklers

2009-11-12T14:04:00.007-05:00

New for the holidays: Stickers for the testy grammar nerd in all of us.

My dear colleague Catherine turned me on to these handy stickers that were designed by a serious grammar nerd, who says:

Does seeing a sign that reads TRY THEY’RE “SANDWICH’S” send you into a fit of apoplectic rage?
Grammar Nerd Corrective Label Pack to the rescue! Simply select the appropriate corrective label from this affordable, laser-printed collection and prepare to dole out frontier-style grammar justice.
The stickers are available for purchase here.

Roomfuls of Letters

2009-11-09T15:21:00.010-05:00

Where I work, we don't get handfuls of letters, we get virtual roomfuls. Here's an unedited excerpt of one that landed in my inbox today:

I was appalled at the glaring grammatical error somehow ignored by your Editoial Staff.The title of the artical Roomfuls of Total Strangers......What are Roomfuls? Or should it be Roomsful?

As the copydesk director, I get to answer these queries. Though often a thankless job, it's usually fun, or at least I try to make it so. For this one, I derived a certain amount of pleasure from my response to the rather unlettered and ungrammatical query:

"Roomfuls of Total Strangers" may sound odd to you, but it is grammatically correct. In Merriam-Webster Unabridged Dictionary, the entry under "roomful" cites the following example: "the group is one of the handsomest and most impressive roomfuls-- R.M.Coates."

Thank you, again, for your query. I have to say that I initially winced at your "glaring grammatical error" and misspelling of "artical," then I realized it must have been on purpose. Likewise with "Editoial."
(T-shirt above available at Amazon.com)

Baited vs. Bated

2009-11-02T08:46:00.005-05:00

"We all pause with baited breath," writes The Secret Agent in this weekend's Financial Times. My dear colleague Jane pointed out this evocative misspelling.

The correct spelling is "bated breath," from the verb bate, meaning "to reduce the force or intensity of; restrain." In this case, holding one's breath in anticipation.

On his terrific blog World Wide Words, British writer Michael Quinion quotes a lovely kitty ditty that uses the incorrectly spelled phrase:

Sally, having swallowed cheese,
Directs down holes the scented breeze,
Enticing thus with baited breath
Nice mice to an untimely death.

I hope you all haven't been waiting with baited or bated breath for posts from me. I've been completely consumed with work and personal life lately, but I hope to post more frequently in the near future. In the meantime, send me a message at david@wordsbetween.com if you have any burning grammar questions--malodorous or not.

Copy Editing Master Class

2009-10-05T15:25:00.004-04:00

If it's October, it must be time for The New Yorker Festival. This annual schmooze-fest brings together the glitteratti of The New Yorker publishing world. Oh, and there are occasional interesting panels and discussions. Several years ago I attended a reading and celebration of Elizabeth Bishop's poetry and was happily transported to a rich and rewarding world.

Last week I was out of town attending my nephew's wedding (congratulations Joaquin and Kayla!), and with the opera and all, I've fallen behind on reading my New Yorkers. On the plane home yesterday, I finally opened the issue with the festival listings and was surprised to see a copy editing master class on the schedule for Sunday, October 18. One of my dream jobs is to be a copy editor at The New Yorker, so I thought it'd be fun and insightful to attend a so-called master class. (The last "Master Class" I attended was Terrence McNally's award-winning Broadway play based on the legendary opera singer Maria Callas--talk about drama!)

Should've read my New Yorker sooner, though, since I just checked and the class is sold out. If anyone out there is lucky enough to attend the class, let me know how it goes.

Word of the Week: Supernumerary

2009-09-16T15:00:00.003-04:00

"Super-what?" That's what I said when a friend told me back in 2002 that he was going to audition with the Washington National Opera as a supernumerary--a non-singing acting role--in the cast for Verdi's opera "Aida."

Seven years and more than 15 opera productions later, I am currently onstage, along with group of fellow "supers" (see photo), in the WNO's production of "The Barber of Seville" at the Kennedy Center.

Supernumerary comes from Latin super numerum, "beyond the number." Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines the noun as "an actor employed to play a walk-on." (For an extended discussion of supernumerary actors, check out this Wikipedia link, with special thanks to WNO Supernumerary Guild President Mike Walker.)

My first supernumerary role, in "Aida" (I auditioned along with my friend and got the part), was as the king's guard. I've since played many guards, servants, and townspeople, sharing the stage with such luminaries as Plácido Domingo, Denyce Graves, and Salvatore Licitra. It's thrilling to work closely with those talented stars, along with the hundreds of other people who contribute to a finished opera, from the performers and chorus, to stagehands, musicians, dressers, costumers, makeup artists, and especially fellow supers.

My life has been enriched by this wonderful experience. (I even met my partner when we were both supers in "Tosca.") My heartfelt thanks goes out to everyone that I have worked with over the years.

If you have the opportunity to catch the current production of "The Barber of Seville" at the Kennedy Center, be sure to look out for me at the top of the show playing a servant. And in the second act, I play the role of the notary.

Pictured from left: David Brindley, Cynthia Hanna (as "Berta") Rey Rivera, Marcos Moncada, and Mike Walker (kneeling)

Fashion Misstatement

2009-08-31T16:09:00.006-04:00

"Say it loud. Say it proud. Say it right."

That's the slogan for Jam Donaldson Designs, a line of T-shirts that seeks to set the record straight on misused phrases. To wit:

"Conversate" is not a word.

It isn't "ironical"

I, myself "isn't necessary"

My favorite, though, is the one pictured: "Irregardless," its wrong.

Um, yep, it's wrong. I'll give the designer an "A" for effort, but you won't see me wearing that incorrectly apostrophized phrase on a T-shirt.

(Purchase the T-shirt pictured above here.)

Word of the Week: Cupcakery

2009-08-26T16:04:00.004-04:00

Neologisms are usually hit or miss. (For a major miss, see my post on "phrasedick.")

Cupcakery is a sure hit. Combining the beloved "cupcake" with "bakery" is a clever conceit.

Bakeries specializing in cupcakes have proliferated lately, and a number of them tie their names to "cupcakery," but today is the first time I've seen the term used in a newspaper headline: "Cupcakeries emerge as Washington's Sweet Spot in a Downturn," read the headline on Washingtonpost.com.

The article reports that at least half a dozen cupcakeries have opened in the D.C. area over the past 20 months. So it looks like this tasty neologism will likely stick.

Jibe vs. Gibe vs. Jive

2009-08-25T11:08:00.003-04:00

"Clinton Trades Jibes With North Korea" read a recent New York Times headline.

It should have been gibe.

According to the New York Times Manual of Style and Usage, "gibe means jeer or taunt. Jibe, colloquially, means conform; in sailing, it means shift."

So Clinton can trade gibes with North Korea, but North Korean actions don't jibe much to U.S. demands.

As for jive, Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines the verb jive as to tease or cajole. It seems the difference between gibe and jive is a matter of degree: gibing is more of a mocking, while jiving is more of a teasing.

Oh, and also dancing or playing music, as in the Jedi jiving on the T-shirt pictured.

("Jedi Jive" T-shirt available at redbubble.com)

No Problem

2009-08-25T08:52:00.004-04:00

Used to be that when you thanked someone for their help, they would say, "You're welcome." Now you're likely to get a "No problem."

That's what the checker at Whole Foods replied when I thanked her for her help last night--even though I bagged all the items myself in my reusable grocery bag.

I've become so used to the "no problem" response that I barely notice it anymore. But my dear friend Ms. Z brought up the topic the other day. Now I hear it all the time. On NPR, for example, guests rarely say "You're welcome" when hosts thank them at the end of interviews.

NPR commentator David Greenberger noted a while back that "no problem" is a poor substitute for "you're welcome." He argued that it emphasizes the negative and gives the following impression: "This kindness I showed you could have resulted in discomfort to me, but lucky for you, it didn't."

I agree. Got a problem with that? Sound off in the comments.

("No Problem" T-shirt available at Zazzle.com)

Got Qat

2009-08-20T12:25:00.007-04:00

It looks like qat is here to stay.

In the comments for my post "Khat vs. Qat," I mentioned the style committee at my work that meets every month to discuss word usage.

We met this morning, and I raised the question of spelling qat versus khat. I got shot down. The feeling among the dozen or so committee members is that they prefer the qat spelling, saying it adds flavor. (No, none of them were chewing cuds of qat.)

That we went through tortuous contortions to explain the odd "qat" spelling, along with pronunciation (rhymes with pot), in an upcoming article didn't bother the other committee members.

But to humor me, the committee decided I should look into how other publications spell the word. (I usually do that before bringing up a style change but neglected to do that this time, figuring khat would prevail.) It's hard to argue against "flavor," though, whatever that is.

Chew on that for a while.

(Photo of man in Yemen chewing qat, courtesy EmptyQuarter.net)

When the Cheese Falls Off Your Cracker

2009-08-18T15:28:00.007-04:00

Where I work, we get lots of letters from folks around the world. Many readers write in to praise articles; many more write in to criticize.

One reader recently sent an email (we still have a "Letters" column, but we rarely receive actual letters; prison inmates are the exception to the email deluge) chiding an author for proposing a seemingly outlandish idea and remarking that the author's "cheese fell off his cracker," that is, the author had obviously lost his wits.

I can't find the origin of this lovely phrase. If you know the origin, let me know in the comments section.

("Cheese and Crackers" T-shirt pictured above is available at Zazzle.com.)

Travails in Siberia

2009-08-11T20:23:00.007-04:00

"Officially, there is no such place as Siberia," Ian Frazier begins his tale of a 2001 rendezvous across the region, published in two installments in The New Yorker (August 3, and 10 & 17, 2009 issues).

But just as in fashionable restaurants in New York and Los Angeles ("Siberia is the section of less desirable tables given to customers whom the maitre d' does not especially like," Frazier helpfully tells us), Siberia exists in publishing: the doldrums of August. And it's apparent that Frazier's long tale of van breakdowns, camping, and insect invasions gets the Siberian treatment by The New Yorker editors.

Sure, the article merited the cover art for the August 3 issue (above), but it wasn't the most inspired cover.

The nail in the Siberian coffin came at the very end of the second portion of the long and meandering article--why Frazier took his journey in 2001 (shortly after President Bush took office) and his account wasn't published until 2009 (into Obama's presidency) is never explained--when, 20 pages after the second portion began, the editors note that "This is the second part of a two-part article."

Well, duh, maybe that would have been pertinent at the beginning of the second portion of the article?

Alpenhorn Blast

2009-08-07T13:38:00.008-04:00

Working in the word business, I find it's easy to get mired in the depressing news of a failing industry. Newspapers and magazines are closing; copydesks are being decimated. Print is dead; the end is near.

Then I read a wonderful article or spot a well-turned phrase, and I'm reminded why I fell in love with words, writing, and journalism.

Writing about the Kindle 2, Nicholson Baker paints a rich image:

Everybody was saying that the new Kindle was terribly important--that it was an alpenhorn blast of post-Gutenbergian revalorization. ("A New Page," The New Yorker, 8/3/09)

It's over-the-top writing, and that's what makes it work in this context.

Hooray for alpenhorns--and for terrific writers.

(Image courtesy Daveybot at Flikr)

Mendacity vs. Mendicancy

2009-08-04T20:22:00.008-04:00

Don't die. That's good advice, generally. But if you are going to die, I suggest you try to outlive your friends. That way you get the last word.

In the July/August issue of The Atlantic, Garry Wills gets the last word on deceased conservative William F. Buckley. In "Daredevil," Wills writes a seemingly sweet profile of his dear, then lost, friend. "Hour by hour, day bay day, Bill Buckley was just an exciting person to be around..." Wills begins his homage to Buckley. Soon thereafter, the knives come out and old wounds bleed anew.

And by the end, Wills calls Buckley out on fouling the English language. On Buckley's propensity to use "big words," Wills writes that Buckley

used the big words for their own sake, even when he was not secure in their meaning. One of his most famous usages poisoned the general currency, especially among young conservatives trying to imitate him. They took oxymoron in the sense he gave it, though that was the opposite of its true meaning. He thought it was a fancier word for "contradiction," so young imitators would say that "an intelligent liberal" was an oxymoron. But the Greek word means "something that is surprisingly true, a paradox," as in a shrewd dumbness.

How very shrewd of Wills for exposing Buckley's dumbness. Call it fiendish friendliness.

Wills goes on to highlight his own shrewdness in word play by trotting out his invention of the word subumbrous, meaning "cloaked in darkness," Wills tells us, "from the Latin sub umbra." While Wills is a literary genius, Buckley was, in the end, a word bumbler: Buckley's

lunge toward risky words was like his other ventures into risk. He could write, for instance, that National Review's "mendacity" prevented the magazine from running free advertisements, when he meant "mendicancy [given to begging]."

Wills's homage seems to lack mendacity, i.e. untruthfulness, but it certainly lacks graciousness.

(Image of "The Patron Saint of Mendacity," by Anthony Mangicapra, courtesy ArtSlant.com)

Khat vs. Qat

2009-08-03T15:48:00.006-04:00

Khat is a plant used as a stimulant in eastern Africa. Leaves from the plant are typically chewed like tobacco. The leaves contain chemicals regulated under the Controlled Substances Act, and since I've never been to Africa, I've never tried it--though I have chewed coca leaves in the Peruvian Andes. (The Partnership for a Drug-Free America provides more information on khat than you can shake a leaf at on their website.)

The word comes from the Arabic qat, and like many transliterated Arabic words, there are numerous ways to spell it in English: cat, kat, khat, qat. Our house style guide prefers "qat," though our guide is decades old, and the propensity to stick with the uncorrupted spelling of the word in Arabic doesn't seem to have much cachet these days. Today we usually follow Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, preferred spellings, in this case, "khat."

When I don't see a clear reason for going with tradition (i.e., the house preferred style), I try to bend the style. So in this case I would opt for "khat."

This may not be the most stimulating post, but sometimes it's the small things we tend to sweat. What would you do: Stay with the old, or opt for Merriam's?

(Drawing courtesy art.net)

The F-Word

2009-07-30T09:41:00.004-04:00

If you like my Word of the Week column, you just might enjoy a new feature called F-Word Of The Day (FWOTD).

Author Jesse Sheidlower's new book, The F-word, explores the word's history (a long and sordid affair, I imagine) and gives lots of examples. In anticipation of the book's publication in early September, Sheidlower will highlight a different F-word every day: Today's entry is, well, it's an adjective defined as "lacking in sexual activity." (Think, feckless, but different.)

Have F-fun!

(F-word T-shirt is available here.)

Largess vs. Largesse

2009-07-27T13:28:00.003-04:00

I hope you all had a good week. My week of vacation was spent by the beach and with rainy days filled with reading.

It's always a pleasure to read, even when it's just a so-so novel. My beach-reading novel this year was The Spanish Bow, by Andromeda Romano-Lax, about a Spanish cellist who meets nearly every European luminary in the first half of the 20th century. The cello is my favorite instrument, though I can't say the unlikely events in the novel make this book my favorite novel.

I was impressed, however, by the fine copyediting throughout the book. Try as I might, I just can't turn off my copyediting mind even when reading a novel for pleasure. I didn't spot a single copyediting mistake in the entire book--unlike the numerous mistakes I noted in Diane Athill's latest memoir, Somewhere Towards the End. The only questionable spelling was "largess," as in generosity. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary prefers "largesse," but lists "largess" as an alternate spelling. It's not wrong without the ending "e," it just caught my attention.

How's your summer reading going? Do you have any recommendations or any copyediting tidbits? Leave a comment below.

Above illustration courtesy terrycolon.com (click on the link for a definition of largess and an explanation of the illustration and pun).

On Vacation

2009-07-17T07:22:00.002-04:00

We're off to the beach for a week! And it's Argos's 11th birthday.

Happy Birthday Argos!

Hyphen Trouble

2009-07-15T10:00:00.002-04:00

From the Chicago Manual of Style Online:

Q. I was not able to find this in CMOS anywhere: how do you hyphenate a word that has both a prefix and a suffix? For example, should “seminationwide” have any hyphens?

A. In Chicago style, it would not have hyphens. I should point out, however, that such a word might invite further editorial scrutiny.

(Comic copyright Chucklehead.com)

The Washington Post Regrets

2009-07-07T08:56:00.004-04:00

Washington Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander wrote a sobering article in the Sunday edition on increased errors--all due to fewer copy editors.

In "Fewer Copy Editors, More Errors," Alexander lists a number of recent slips that would make any copy editor's hair stand on end. To wit: "Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter was described as a 'ferocious' (instead of voracious) reader."

As Alexander points out, "Copy editors are the unsung heroes of newsrooms. Unknown to the public, and often underappreciated by their colleagues, they're the last line of defense against a correction or, worse, a libel suit." That hasn't stopped the suits from slashing copy editors from the staff; roughly half the copy editor positions at the Post have been eliminated since 2005. Bill Walsh, copy desk chief at the Post, says "By definition, you'll see more errors when there's reduced staffing."

Not surprisingly, readers are noticing, and writing in. And the paper's long-standing credibility is quickly crumbling. Ombudsman Alexander encourages readers to write in, but in the face of a major restructuring of copy desks at the paper this week that centralizes the work for print, online, and mobile audiences, he asks for patience and understanding.

Once you give up hope for credibility, patience and understanding are sure to run out as well.

(Purchase Craig Silverman's Regret the Error at Amazon.com.)

Hitchens Hath Hatred, Part Two

2009-06-30T15:24:00.005-04:00

You may recall my post on Christopher Hitchens's hatred for copy editors. Hitch has redeemed himself, at least in this copy editor's eyes, with his latest diatribe, on Richard Nixon. In yesterday's column on Slate.com, "Caught on Tape," he admits that

the thought of the Nixon gang in the White House still infuses me with a pure and undiluted hatred and makes me consider throwing up things that I don't even remember having eaten.

Such a way with words, and so much hatred to share.

Don't Be a Dick: Phrasedick

2009-06-29T11:25:00.005-04:00

I hereby interrupt my regular "Don't Be a Dick" series to bring you a new entry: William Safire, of New York Times fame and coiner of the word phrasedick.

Phrasedick? I'm afraid so. Since putting the word in print first in his March 27, 1983, Times Magazine column, "The Phrasedick Brigade," Safire has continued to repeatedly flog his coinage. Yesterday's column, "Location, Location, Location," marked the fourth time this year he's used the term, and roughly the 37th time it's appeared in his columns.

Not surprisingly, the word hasn't caught on. I mean, really, Bill, who wants to be a dick? Of course Safire's term harks back to dicks of yore, i.e., detectives. But that hasn't made it any more popular. (For an analysis of the meaning of the term, see "OED--Dick Edition.")

As Gawker noted in 2007, phrasedick is "most likely the speechwriter's and pundit's least successful coinage in a remarkable career of coinaging."

It's no wonder.

(Photo of William Safire on NBC courtesy of Gawker)

Loath vs. Loathe

2009-06-28T08:39:00.003-04:00

It's Sunday morning and time not for church, but for laundry. I loathe doing laundry, but I'm not loath to do it.

What's the difference? Loathe, with an e, is the verb, meaning to feel intense dislike or even digust for. It's often used as an antonym for love: "Loathe him or love him, there's no escaping him." (Fill in for "him" your choice of celebrity/politician/ex lover, etc.)

Loath is the adjective, meaning unwilling to do something, or reluctant. "American publishers these days are loath to publish collections and micellanies except by 'brand-name' authors." (New Yorker, June 22, 2009, page 87.) It's not the same as to hate doing something, one is just reluctant.

By the way, loathing is the noun, meaning extreme disgust or detestation. Hunter S. Thompson made the word famous with his novel Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

(The above T-shirt isn't available, but you can get the logo here.)

i.e. vs. e.g.

2009-06-23T14:08:00.004-04:00

I was never fully exposed to Latin. I didn't study it in school, and although I was raised Roman Catholic, I arrived on the scene after the reforms of Vatican II, which led to the decline of the Latin Mass.

Latin still has a hold on the English language, though. Case in point is the use of i.e. and e.g.--and the apparent confusion between the two.

I.e. is short for the Latin id est, meaning that is. It's used to specify something or to make something more clear and can stand in for "in other words," "it is," or "that is."

E.g. is the abbreviation for the Latin exempli gratia, roughly meaning for example. It's used to give an example or in place of "including" when not giving an entire list.

Both Latin terms are used to clarify a broad point, but i.e. is used before a restatement, while e.g. is used before a specific example. Confused? I'd craft a few examples, but this usage doesn't come naturally to me, i.e., I don't use them frequently enough in my writing. More deft writers, e.g. John McIntyre at You Don't Say, would have more luck giving examples.

Here's one tip to distinguish between the two. When you give an example, which begins with an e, use e.g.

(T-shirt pictured above--for industrial engineers--is available here.)

The Blame Game

2009-06-20T11:34:00.005-04:00

There's an interesting debate at the Toronto Star about attributing errors in articles.

In "Who takes the fall for errors?" public editor Kathy English discusses whether errors inserted during the editing process should be attributed, as in "Due to an editing error..." This is common at many newspapers and takes the blame off the bylined author. The Star doesn't go that way, though, and follows the philosophy of collective errors:

the Star has a long-standing policy that says published corrections do not "ascribe blame" because "publishing the Star is a team effort." That means, unlike some newspapers, the Star does not indicate in corrections when a mistake is "due to an editing error."

Nor do we tell readers that mistakes are due to an error by a reporter, a photographer, a researcher, an artist or anyone else in the newsroom. The guiding logic here is the newsroom's collective responsibility for all of its errors.

The article discusses a case where an error was inserted by the copy editor. It's heartening to know that the end product is correctly seen as a team effort. Every day copy editors correct mistakes of reporters, none of which are pointed out in the article. But when a copy editor goofs, the reporter typically is outraged. (As a former reporter, I can understand the outrage, especially since the article is under the reporter's name. But many people work on the article, none of whom get credit.) As English says:

Having worked as a copy editor, I also believe in the philosophy of collective responsibility. I agree with those editors who make the case that even "editing errors" can be a shared responsibility in cases where a reporter's copy was unclear. I also know how many times great copy editors have "saved" me by catching the errors I've missed before they make the paper.

Then she points out the bottom line: "But the real question in this debate is what best serves readers?" After discussions with the publisher and senior editors, the Star decided to stick with its policy of collective responsibility.

Our consensus was that Star readers quite likely hold this news organization responsible overall for its errors. The research we've seen generally indicates readers don't particularly care whether an error was the fault of a reporter or an editor. They want wrongs righted, accuracy valued and steps taken to prevent errors.

Do you agree with the newspaper's policy?

Swathe Me Now

2009-06-17T13:30:00.006-04:00

A friend wrote a great article on facials for Father's Day: "Man, I Feel Like a Facial: Guy-friendly, Relaxing Treatments for Father's Day."

When the proud father of the article showed it to me, I couldn't help but point out the copyediting error in the sentence, "Steaming towels swath the face."

According to Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, swath is the noun meaning a long, broad strip or belt, or a space devastated as if by a scythe. Swathe is the noun (a band used in swathing) or verb (to bind, wrap, or swaddle with a bandage, or to envelop) and the correct spelling of the word in the article.

The small error won't lessen anyone's enjoyment of the article, or the Father's Day gift of a relaxing facial.

(Attention new daddies, the Newborn Egg Swathe, pictured above, is featured on Etsy.com. Photo by Patti VanHuizen)

Word of the Week: Bootleg

2009-06-15T16:58:00.006-04:00

I caught a snippet of a bootleg version of a film on YouTube over the weekend. First I wondered why people bother with bootleg videos, since the quality is so bad. Then I got to wondering how poor-quality videos on the Internet ever came to be called "bootlegged." Did the word really come from the leg of a boot?

The short answer is yes. YourDictionary.com says, bootleg "originated from the habit of men, when they wore high boots in centuries past, of smuggling objects across borders by hiding them in the legs of their boots."

According to the online Oxford English Dictionary, the word stems from "boot-legger, one who carries liquor in his boot-legs; hence, an illicit trader in liquor." The OED traces the usage from alcohol to "gramophone records and tapes prepared and distributed without authorization," though the master dictionary hasn't caught up to DVDs and online videos.

From contraband stowed in boots to contraband on the Internet. I can imagine that copyright owners of original material would prefer to kick some butt with those boots.

(Image of "The Bootleg Series, Vol. 6: Bob Dylan Live, 1964" album cover)

Auger vs. Augur

2009-06-11T10:01:00.005-04:00

We know that farmers, among others, use augers in their work. And we often hear about how the latest economic indicators don't augur a quick recovery.

So when the Washington Post ran a recent story saying that construction crews "have dug 30-foot-deep trenches and augured 250-foot conduit sleeves beneath roads," a keen-eyed reader wrote in pointing out the grammatical error.

For the record: an auger is a noun, defined in Webster's Collegiate Dictionary as "any of various tools or devices having a helical shaft or member that are used for boring holes (as in wood, soil, or ice) or moving loose material (as snow)." Augur is both a noun ("1 : an official diviner of ancient Rome 2 : one held to foretell events by omens") and, more commonly used today, a verb:

1 : to foretell especially from omens
2 : to give promise of : PRESAGE *higher pay augurs a better future*
intransitive verb : to predict the future especially from omens

As Donald R. Juran, from Rockville, Maryland, noted in his letter to the Post, "This does not augur well."

(Photo: Gratuitous image of model Nick Auger found on the Internet but unable to provide source credit)

Word of the Week: Smorgasbord

2009-06-08T14:03:00.005-04:00

In describing the melange of offerings available on a website, I used the word "smorgasbord": "The website has a smorgasbord of offerings to whet your appetite."

When I read the sentence out loud, I loved the sumptuous, rich sound of smorgasbord; I could almost sink my teeth into it. From whence did this wonderful word wend its way to the English language?

From the Swedes--not the typical luscious-language providers of the world. The online Oxford English Dictionary lists the etymology as:

(smgsbd) [a. Sw., f. smörgås (slice of) bread and butter (f. smör butter, cogn. w. SMEAR n. + gås goose, lump of butter) + bord BOARD n., table: cf. SMORREBROD.]

And from the OED's first definition ("1. The Swedish hors d'uvres, typically comprising a cold table of open sandwiches served with an assortment of delicacies; also provided as a separate meal or buffet") we've progressed to the meaning I used in my sentence: "2. fig. A medley, miscellany; a rich variety or selection."

English is great that way, borrowing words from other languages and adapting them for other uses. The English language offers a rich smorgasbord indeed.

(You can purchase the above T-shirt a Zazzle.com.)

Emigrate vs. Immigrate

2009-06-05T12:06:00.005-04:00

I posted recently on the incorrect use of "immigrant" for Puerto Ricans. The same goes for "emigrant," since Puerto Ricans are citizens.

What's the difference between "emigrate" and "immigrate." It has to do with coming or going: emigrate refers to leaving a homeland; immigrate refers to arriving in a new country. The usual distinction is that one emigrates from while one immigrates to. My friend Riccardo emigrated from Italy. Sofia immigrated to the U.S. from Chile.

But as The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage explains,

Either word can be followed by from or to, depending on the context: when focusing on life or conditions in the old country, write, She emigrated from Sweden or She emigrated to Canada. When focusing on life or conditions in the new country, write, She immigrated from Sweden or She immigrated to Canada.

When President Bush was in the White House, a lot of my friends considered emigrating to Canada. Now we're content staying in our homeland.

Insure vs. Ensure

2009-06-04T11:37:00.008-04:00

Ah, the subtleties of the English language. (Or, Where one letter makes a small difference.)

Editing a manuscript yesterday, I found the author using "insure" and "ensure." Most style guides make the distinction between the two words. For example, The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage says,

Insure means buy or issue insurance: She insured her camera against theft.

Ensure means guarantee or make safe: The hit ensured a Yankee victory.

Knowing this distinction, I was going to change "insure" to "ensure" in the following sentence: "If you [a flower] produce a scent that attracts only the males of one particular species of bee, you can insure that your pollen will end up precisely where you want it." It's not as though the flower is taking out an insurance policy on its pollen.

Then, two paragraphs below, the author used "ensure": "Yet their small numbers ensure their survival." The author clearly was making a distinction between the two words. Did he know something I didn't?

Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines ensure as "to make sure, certain, or safe"; and insure as "1: to provide or obtain insurance on or for; 2: to make certain especially by taking necessary measures and precautions." For usage, it says:

ensure and insure are interchangeable in many contexts where they indicate the making certain or inevitable of an outcome, but ensure may imply a virtual guarantee <ensured the safety of the refugees>, while insure sometimes stresses the taking of necessary measures beforehand <insure the success of the party>

The author seemed to be following the usage in Webster's, and not the NYT guide. I decided to keep his original language, even though I prefer to make the insure-as-insurance distinction. It blurs the line, but then there are so few clear lines in word usage.

"The" Earth

2009-06-01T19:15:00.005-04:00

I often wonder what drives people to write letters to publications. I suppose it's the need to be heard, and perhaps the desire to see their name in print.

I've never been a letter-to-the-editor writer, but since I work for a national magazine with a huge subscription base, I receive a fair number of those letters--and I'm not even the editor in chief.

Today I received a letter from a concerned reader about the use of the article in "the Earth."

The wha? Apparently it's this reader's pet peeve to see "the Earth" used when "Earth" by itself is understandable and unambiguous. His concern was heartfelt, genuine, tactful, and so I politely answered him and agreed that perhaps the article isn't necessary, though it's not incorrect. It is idiomatic, and so why not leave it in if a writer submits it that way?

To be honest, I hadn't really thought about it before. Now I will consider his suggestion to drop the article in the future. Isn't it great that people care enough to voice their concern and send in a suggestion, even on the smallest usage matters?

On the other hand, what about the 40-page article on world hunger, or recent articles on vanishing species and climate change? What about things that really matter in our world? Yes, grammar and good writing are important, but a letter on the article "the"?

(Photo courtesy F. Hasler, et al, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and NASA)

Word of the Week: Hibernacula

2009-05-29T07:56:00.005-04:00

Elizabeth Kolbert's fascinating and alarming article on mass extinctions, in the May 25 issue of the New Yorker, includes the word "hibernacula."

A hibernaculum (the singular form) is the shelter of a hibernating animal. In "The Sixth Extinction?" Kolbert refers to the winter home of hibernating bats. (Who knew that bats hibernate?) As Kolbert reports in gory detail, hibernating bats in northeastern U.S. and Canada are facing extinction as they succumb to white-nose syndrome. (The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides information on the sydrome here.)

According to the American Heritage Dictionary, hibernaculum comes from "Latin hibernaculum, winter residence, from hibernare, to winter, from hibernus, relating to winter."

There doesn't seem to be a direct connection between hibernacula and Dracula (a nickname of Prince Vlad of Walachia [d.1476], according to the Online Etymology Dictionary). But the connection isn't so far-fetched in my mind.

After Deadline: "Openly Gay"

2009-05-27T08:11:00.006-04:00

This week's After Deadline column hits close to home. The first topic discusses the use of "openly gay":

in most…contexts where sexual orientation is relevant, we can simply state that someone is gay without the “openly.” Using the modifier when it’s not necessary suggests that there is still something surprising about not concealing one’s orientation.

So just for the record: I'm gay, and I'm open about it.

The next topic addresses the problem of referring to Puerto Ricans who move from the island to the continental U.S. as "immigrants." Here's a correction on an article in last Friday's edition:

An article on Friday about Judge Sonia Sotomayor, a possible candidate for nomination to the Supreme Court, referred incorrectly to her parents. As people who moved to New York from Puerto Rico, they were United States citizens. They were not “immigrants.”

Also for the record: My partner is from Puerto Rico and he's a citizen, not an immigrant.

Giving Credit

2009-05-26T10:12:00.006-04:00

Do you ever notice, or even read, credits for photographs or artwork or charts? I spend an inordinate amount of time on credits, and where I work, there's even a full-time person devoted to photo credits, rights clearances, and payments. But I wonder if anyone else even notices them--except for the artist and perhaps his or her spouse or parents.

Of course, giving credit for work is important, but why does it take so much time and aggravation? For artwork and maps and charts and the like, it's a challenge to give credit where it's due and in a logical and fair order, albeit in tiny type that won't distract the reader from the illustrations themselves.

When I read other magazines, I tend to read the credits. For quality stock photos, Getty Images is a giant, the Microsoft of photo agencies. So what Getty wants, Getty gets. Not content with just Getty Images in credit lines, Getty has added "Reportage by Getty" and new for me, "Contour by Getty." Where Reportage is the showcase for Getty's award-winning photojournalists, Contour is for celebrities--both in front of the camera and behind.

Steve Pyke's portrait of Chief Justice John Roberts, credited to Contour by Getty in last week's New Yorker, seems to establish Justice Roberts as a celebrity. So much for gravitas.

(You can purchase the above T-shirt here.)

General Logan's Memorial Day

2009-05-25T05:00:00.000-04:00

Happy Memorial Day. To many of us, the holiday marks the beginning of the summer beach season and a long weekend.

Every year there's a festival in Logan Circle (right, where I live in Washington, D.C.) to commemorate the official proclamation on 5 May 1868 by General John Logan founding Memorial Day. The first official Memorial Day was observed on May 30, 1868.

Note the use of the word "observed" and not "celebrated." It was a solemn day of commemoration, surely not filled with barbecues, hamburgers, and hot dogs. Things change; holidays are transformed. But our country is still fighting wars, and those who have been killed in the service of our nation deserve commemoration.

You Slay Me

2009-05-24T05:00:00.004-04:00

I work with a number of delightful colleagues. They're funny, smart, creative, kind, generous--and nothing like me.

I'm of the old-school ogre type. In fact, an employee once accused me of verbal assault. For the record, I was a supervisor offering constructive advice on how the employee could perform more effectively.

Back to my dear colleagues, one of which alerted me to two funny cartoons in this week's New Yorker. One deals with the meaning of "decimate." Says one marauding Viking to another: "Did you know that 'decimate' means kill just one out of every ten?" Believe it or not, we do know that where I work, and it often comes up.

The second cartoon is more risque: A man and woman are in the missionary position in bed; the woman says to the man, "You don't need to sacrifice good grammar in order to talk dirty."

We do try to enjoy ourselves at work. I hope you are surrounded with such delightful colleagues in your work.

Facile Language

2009-05-23T05:00:00.002-04:00

"This is a facile read..." wrote a book reviewer on Amazon.com about Carlos Prieto's The Adventures of a Cello.

That usage struck me as odd. I've heard of facile minds, but a facile read? It makes me think of a less benign meaning: superficial and shallow, such as a facile argument. The odd usage misled me, until the reviewer wrote that the book was "entertaining and enlightening."

I just wish the review were more enlightening than obfuscating.

(Illustration from the collection "Existential Beasts," by Steve Wilson.)

Than vs. Then

2009-05-22T08:07:00.005-04:00

CreekHiker, a regular reader of this blog, commented earlier this week:

My personal grammatical pet peeve, found on Woot.com today: If the medium is the message, than the message occasionally needs an upgrade to the most recent standards.

Oof! I don't come across this error very often, but that's because I usually read articles that have been edited. A copy editor knows the difference between the two: "than" is used in comparisons, "then" for everything else. So if you're not making a comparison, then use "then."

Now what medium do we use to get this message out to keep standards up and keep us less grumpy?

Who vs. That

2009-05-18T05:00:00.002-04:00

A colleague recently came to my office and announced: "I have a question for Words Between the Spaces."

Picking up on an edge of exasperation in her voice, I thought, Uh, oh. But hers was an easy query. "Which is correct?" she pleaded. " 'A girl who likes to cook,' or 'A girl that likes to cook'?"

I told her we use "who" when referring to people, and "that" when referring to objects.

"Oh," she said, as the exasperation ebbed from her voice and her face was suddenly alight with the satisfaction of having grammatically bested a foe. "It's that simple?"

Well, yes, and no.

As with most grammar "rules," there's no hard and fast rule on using "who" with people, rather than "that." It's a matter of house style for publications, and personal preference. Most people use "who," but not all sources agree.

The American Heritage Dictionary, for one, has this usage note in its entry for who: "it is entirely acceptable to write either the woman that wanted to talk to you or the woman who wanted to talk to you."

"Entirely acceptable..." That's why people say and write "that" instead of "who."

I prefer to use "who." But I'm also a guy that allows for other points of view.

Restaurant Review on Wry

2009-05-15T05:00:00.001-04:00

If you've ever tried to write a restaurant review, you know how difficult a task it can be. How do you convey all the factors that go into a good or bad meal? (Come to think of it, writing a review of any creative endeavor is difficult.) To my mind, restaurants create an especial challenge, though.

That's why I'm so enamored with Leo Carey's miraculously concise review of Delicatessen in this week's New Yorker. I haven't been to Delicatessen in SoHo, but Carey takes me there in his vivid description of the food, space, and people that inhabit its environs--including the "club-ready waitstaff" who are "all Mohicans and triceps and tatoos." He also ingeniously ties the fate of the restaurant and its tenuous perch in New York's restaurant scene to the current financial crisis (i.e., not long for this life).

The clincher: "As the name suggests, Delicatessen is a jokey homage to the Jewish deli--pastrami on wry."

(When in Manchester, Connecticut, stop by Pastrami on Wry, if only for its witty name.)

I edited my thoughts today:

2009-05-14T05:00:00.000-04:00