ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

... would be my personal answer and attitude

In other words, the bell hooks/k.d. lang problem. I've noticed that the New York Times ignores these idiosyncratic spellings and just goes with Bell Hooks and K.D. Lang (presumably to avoid this predicament), but in this Austin Chronicle article about the former, the writer starts sentences with "hooks" several times.

Knowing nothing about the subject, I'm curious: does capping the N in "n-3 fatty acids" mean something different?

I just proof the damn stuff, but I don't think so.

The AMA manual, since stuff this specific, isn't indexed, is frequently no help at all.

haha i have subbed bell hooks -- she is just the WORST stylist, and throws tantrums when you try and suggest improvements

prob w.having caps and non-caps in formulae would be exactly that someone would read it and think "is this meant to mean something different?" -- ie it introduces confusion and doubt, hence avoid if possible

(i can think of plenty of mathematical contexts where it WOULD change the meaning)

It might confuse an uninformed reader to see a sentence like, "The next lecture in the series will feature bell hooks."

Luckily, E.E. Cummings poses no such problems.

i once had to stomp on a gallery who insisted for the catalogue we were producing that we put TWO spaces between the "The" and whatever their poncey name was -- i told em that the computers wouldn't let us, it automatically corrected and they would have to lump it (= a lie, obv)

they went out of business so the problem disappeared

"a pair of legal analysts say(s)"

"says." The object is the pair-- ONE pair, therefore singular :)

Or were you asking?

My answer depends on what they're saying.

Well, in the strictest sense, it'd be "says." However, if these two legal analysts were saying it seperately, that wouldn't be conveyed with "says," so the sentence would need a rewrite to something like "Two legal analysts say..."

I was asking, thx. (They're writing together, those analysts, which by AMA standards clinches "says.")

xpost, exactly

Yeah, that's sort of what I was getting at. Are they saying the exact same thing at the same time? (Of course, changing "a pair of" to "two" avoids this dilemma altogether.)

Is it bad that I'm more than a tiny bit proud that I answered that?

Nope. I just sat through an hourlong "grammar review" at work this morning.

love reading this thread

xpost

and you agreed to abolish hyphens in prenominal adjectives?

(ducks)

prenominal compound adjectives, natch.

Why would we do that?

"black cab driver" vs. "black-cab driver"

1/N, damnit

pear says
pears say

Black-cab? Is that a thing?

It is in the UK.

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Travel/Transport/Taxi/TaxiCab.jpg

Is it something you have to specify at any point? Like, are there yellow cabs and black cabs and one's worth more or less than the other, and you have to say to someone "Hey, I think he's a black-cab driver, let's ask him for a ride"?

"Hey, you --- you black cab-driving jerk!" = comes off racist
"Hey, you --- you black cab--driving jerk!" = doesn't

Further confusion is added when you realise there are no* black black-cab drivers in London.

*or if there is I've yet to see one

or if there are

they'd be black-^2-cab drivers

Is it something you have to specify at any point?

Apparently.

er, yes: ie to differentiate between a dude who drives a minicab and a dude who drives a black cab.

minicabs = unlicensed
black cabs = licensed, have to pass an exam where everything within a certain radius is

not all black cabs are black these days

pedant.

;)

IT'S MY JOB

AND YOURS

AND MORBSES

LUCKY US

praise be! w00t, etc.

actually, i got asked in the pub last night what subeditors actually did.

"everything".

I'm glad I do "everything" in the US, since I'm not sure I like what the "sub-" prefix implies. Nor do I like your period outside the quotes, but we've been over that.

actually, no, you're right; shoulda been inside there.

as for the "sub" bit ... people infer all sorts of oddness. at the first (very small) place i was a staffer, i went from being a subeditor to being assistant editor.

"oh," said a relative. "so, you were ... umm, demoted?"

Hi there. Few questions...

1. Is the word "quintessence" an absolute? I mean, is it alright to say "the most quintessential" for instance?

2. This is down to style really, but what do you prefer - If referring to oneself in, say a review, do you say I/We/You/One?

I've got a question:

long johns (the kind that keep you warm in winter)

Is this an Americanism?

maria: i don't think so, no. i'd call a pair of long johns a pair of long johns before anything else.

TNG: 1) i think it is. "most quintessential" just sounds tautological.

2) "I". i think all else looks like you once read somewhere that you shouldn't use the word "I" in a review, so you're feebly trying to avoid it ;)

You can't be a bit quintessential any more than you can be a bit unique or a bit pregnant: it's an absolute. It's also a cliche, but that's by the by.

Re: using first person in copy, I'm tacitly happy to use "I" in a review, but I'll pretty much always favour "we" in a feature.

Or a bit dead! The unique thing, man that drives me CRAZY.

"Hey, you --- you black cab--driving jerk!"

Dear Efrim, this is the silliest name yet, but good work on the dash differentiation.

Thangyewverymuch, and apparently I won't be here all week, since it took me a week to reply to that and all.

(I love this thread! I'll stop ruining it now.)

hahaha, the BBC News website is such shit. They do this kind of thing with a little too much frequency:

The 23-year-old is due to make her first public appearance since attending rehab at the award ceremony.

these data vs this data

Webster's says that both are standard. My inclination would be to go with "this data," since "these data" is starting to sound stuffy, but I suppose there's a place for the latter if it's actually in reference to multiple, discrete pieces of information.

the AMA likes stuffy, it seems.