Give vs. Gives

So I'm stumped. When is "give" supposed to be used as opposed to "gives?" For example, I came across this sentence:

A kind and generous family give us each a cold beer.

And how would one go about finding the answer to such a question when google fails?

They Banned "Bromance"

Well, they "banished" the word, not the special relationship. Lake Superior State University annually releases a list of words that they are sick of. The 2010 list contains words that they consider to be especially overused, misused, or useless.

1. shovel-ready
2. transparent/transparency
3. czar
4. tweet
5. app
6. sexting
7. friend as a verb ("friending," "unfriending," etc.)
   
8. teachable moment
9. in these economic times...
10. stimulus
11. toxic assets
12. too big to fail
13. bromance
14. chillaxin'
15. Obama-prefix or roots (i.e., Obamanomics)

I found this rather random bit while looking up stuff on cliches, which I find very problematic while copyediting. The magazine I work for does a lot of travel-type pieces and I often find myself striking out the ol' "it wasn't the destination that counted, it was the journey" sentiment.

Cliches are rather interesting though. I think they say something about the mass appeal, durability, and utility that a certain phrase or word has. And there's a fair chance that if you saw a stranger's list of cliches, you would be surprised by some of it. Nonetheless, cliches don't belong in polished writing. But recognizing them is tricky. The magazine's editor might be bugged by something that seems innocuous enough to me and vice-versa. If the both of us agree that the phrasing is tired, then we will probably strike it from the copy. If, following a discussion, only one of us is bothered by it, the phrasing is left intact.

Omitting a Conjunction in a Series

After doing the sentence error exercise, I've learned a new rule that I thought I would say a little more about. This is number seven on the sample questions page:

They said they plan to sleep in their SUV, a five-year-old Chevy Tahoe, into which they’ve packed boxes of important documents, bags of clothes, some food

I mistakenly added the word "and" between the serial comma and the last item in the series, which is actually unnecessary. Below is an excerpt from the ClearWriter website.

"Dropping a conjunction has the opposite effect of adding a conjunction: creating a series that is not exhaustive, but a mere sampling of possibilities. It also makes your reader see the parts of the series as more separate than joined.

This 20th century is baffling, difficult, paradoxical, revolutionary."

:)

Angry Copyeditors

I think we've read something similar to the "Apostrophe Catastrophe" article (but hopefully not the same thing!). I was struck by the manner in which the author was so upset by the excessive use of apostrophes. The following sentence is pretty indicative of the whole piece: "My long-simmering irritation over the apostrophe crisis finally reached a boil the other night while helping my 11-year-old daughter with her homework."

Woah.

Is the author a volcano or a human being? Either way, it looks like things are going to be on fire soon. I've got to say, I can't blame people for sometimes thinking copyeditors to be grumpy, insufferable jerks with raging superiority complexes. Sure, the angry rants and grammar vengeance blogs are fun to read, but I'm starting to wonder if "grammar snobbery" plays a part.

This class has definitely hammered home the point that there is a way to be constructive and helpful without being mad, demeaning, and dehumanizing. In sum, I think that Pat's emphasis on the "authors are people too" matter is really, really important and I think it's good to see it modeled so well in class. Also, this article has made me realize that it's totally possible to care about the correct use of language without being a raging grammar nazi.

Punctuation Review

So, in anticipation of our quiz, I've been looking at chapter 4 and two other sites:

(1) Grammar Girl - I've put a link to her discussion of a common error, the comma splice (even though the link is included under "references" to the right). This refers to the tendency by which two main clauses are separated only by a comma, rather than by a comma and a coordinating conjunction (alternatively, the two clauses can be separated by a period or semicolon).

Incorrect
"Squiggly ran to the forest, Aardvark chased the peeves."

Correct
"Squiggly ran to the forest, and Aardvark chased the peeves."

(2) The Sentence Sleuth - This blog is run by a copyeditor who was a guest writer on the Grammar Girl site four or five times. It's a little less polished, but not horrible. And the idea behind it is so simple: take a sentence and point out an error.

Our textbook is obviously a much more broad review of grammar applications, etc. but these sites provide short yet memorable discussion which I think will make the studying process a little more varied and a little easier.

Okina & the Islands

I was just wondering which of the islands (besides O‘ahu) take an okina. I've flipped through some of the locally produced magazines here and I can pretty much guarantee that I'm not the only one with this question. I saw the okina popping up in what seemed to be really awkward places (Mau‘i). But I can't deny that finding an answer is hard - I've tried looking up the correct spelling on the state's website, wikipedia, random google searches, etc., but so far the results have been so inconsistent! This leads me to a secondary question as well: what kind of resources would you consult in order to check the on the definitive spelling of Hawaiian words?

Grammar Impact - "Politicians, Watch Your Grammar"

I thought this article about how small changes in grammar evoke (slightly) different reactions was interesting. Maybe even important. I mean, it kind of gives more weight to the editor's duty, doesn't it? Editor's have the power to change the way that people read things and interpret information -- that's a sizable burden resting on the decision as to whether to use the imperfect or perfect aspect!

The author defines these aspects as such:

" '[W]as having' and 'was taking' are known as the imperfect aspect, meaning an event may be continuing. But 'had' and 'took' are known as the perfect aspect, meaning the event is bounded in time.

Locations

While editing for my internship, a question arose: do I capitalize terms such as Eastside, Westside, etc.? The rule for cardinal directions seems to be that the lowercase is used if the directions merely indicate direction (ex: Honolulu is south of Waimea) and capitalized when they refer to places (ex: the South). My guess would be that the terms "Eastside", etc. refer to proper places so they should be capitalized?

The Grammar Vandal

So, I found a blog by this woman that has apparently has made it her mission to make fun of and deride businesses that dare violate the rules of grammar, spelling, etc. It's good reading! There's interesting stuff such as a diagram of one of Obama's more complex sentences, a spelling error on an American Eagle t-shirt, a selection of quotes from a really crazy argument about grammar on Facebook, and other such smirk-worthy items. Here is one of her posts that made me chuckle:

"This is my new favorite entry on my new favorite Web site, fmylife.com:

Today, I was flirting via text with a coworker. Things started getting heated, and I wanted to send her a sexy picture. I asked if she had any suggestions. She said, “Your nuts!” She meant, 'YOU’RE nuts.'... FML."

Here, we see very clearly the relation between grammar fail and epic fail.

Parentheses Problem

Recently, I've been encountering a new way to format a parenthetical sentence. And I was following the book's explanation for this new structuring, till I found this (p. 76-77):

• Last year popular fiction accounted for half of all books purchased. (Business and self-help books were the second largest category.)

• Last year popular fiction accounted for half of all books purchased (business and self-help books were the second largest category).

From what I've read, it looks like the period would be on the inside of the parentheses if the sentence was "its own complete" sentence; otherwise, it would be outside. Yet, the only difference between the sentences is format, not content. Does this mean that the definition of "complete" sentences at some point becomes subjective and that subsequently the placement of parenthetical sentences also becomes subjective? Thanks :)

"Nit-picker's Bible"

So, Google News has informed me that the 16th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style has just been released and is generating a lot of buzz. Well, buzz for a bunch of grammar nerds anyway. So, here are some of the facts I found interesting while reading this 3 PAGE homage:

• The Chicago Manual of Style has 11,000+ fans on FB.
  
• The preferred spelling of the term "U.S." has been updated to: "US."
  
• The proper citation for Wikipedia is now included.
  
• The rule for sequential punctuation marks has been rethought - "Chicago says it is now OK in certain situations to use a comma directly after a question mark or exclamation point."
• People seem to do more than just respect this book - they love it. They adore it. They want to make little half-text, half-human babies with it.
  

Overall, it was kind of interesting to read some of the ways that copyeditors think about this book. It's clear that it's one of their most vital tools. During editing tests they're often given this book and nothing else to reference. I've had to use it, but it certainly hasn't taken on the significance for me that it has for others. Not yet, anyway :D

Bathroom Graffiti Grammar Refresher

No "call xxx-xxxx for a good time" or "Waimanalo PRIDE" scribbles on this bathroom door in Moore Hall. Instead, here we find a handy reminder that seems to have been born out of some student's grammatical frustration. Ah, college is an interesting place, isn't it? :]