ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

i'm making the style guide!

but yes that is helpful

AP seems to want to avoid hyphens whenever possible, but I think you def. need it in "automobile-related products" and "well-trained dog."

I would write "a well-trained dog" but "the dog is well trained".

(on the grounds that I'm not answering "what kind of dog is it?", but telling the reader that the dog was trained well). Do people agree?

Somebody tell me about the word "whilst." It seems everyone uses it in the UK, and nobody uses it in the US... is i actually just a synonym for "while," or are there cases where one's correct to use and one isn't?

I suppose I could look this up, but I figure some folks here will have more insight.

I agree, Alba. I mentioned that a few posts up.

I would write "a well-trained dog" but "the dog is well trained".

Yes, this is the basic/common use of hyphens for compound modifiers -- e.g., if we still always used "health care" as two words, we'd talk about "the expenses of health care" but also "health-care expenses" ...

... this is sometimes a problem in my work, because if you change one adjective use to be hyphenated, non-editors down the line will often think "oh, this word is supposed to be hyphenated -- and look, they missed all these other instances, we'd better change that!"

ugh i know...

also WHILST use by non-britishes makes me want to say asshole things like 'faagg' all idiocracy style. reminds me of highschool drama students

Somebody tell me about the word "whilst." It seems everyone uses it in the UK, and nobody uses it in the US... is i actually just a synonym for "while," or are there cases where one's correct to use and one isn't?

They mean exactly the same thing and can be used interchangeably, 'whilst' is just more formal.

where is the thread for people who are driven crazy by writing, editing, re-writing, re-editing, re-writing etc etc press releases

because i'm being driven crazy

less crazy now

i have a question for you guys about something that has always bothered me: the way people use the word "choice". now if i'm not mistaken a choice is a decision in front of somebody where several options are available. yet you constantly hear that "we have two choices" -- for instance, between a blue couch and a white couch. to me, that's ONE choice. am i right?

whoa
i'm pretty tired so this is kind of blowing my mind
what if one of the couches is in 1950 and we accidently got sent back in time and no i am not going to make the joke i was about to make

so what do you call a choice btwn to things then?

two things

tracer, 'choice' has two meanings there:

1) 'choice' meaning 'a decision'
2) 'choice' meaning 'an option' (out of several)

so you can make a choice between two choices

what i am saying is that the second definition is specious

a choice between two things is a choice, not two choices

1: the act of choosing : selection <finding it hard to make a choice>
2: power of choosing : option <you have no choice>
3 a: the best part : cream b: a person or thing chosen <she was their first choice>
4: a number and variety to choose among <a plan with a wide choice of options>
5: care in selecting
6: a grade of meat between prime and good

besides "a choice of two choices" would never be said, because it highlights exactly the weird slippage that bothers me so

ohhh

when the choice (as in 4) still exists - i.e. you have a choice between the white couch and the blue couch - they have NOT BEEN CHOSEN YET, therefore are not eligible for defn 3b!

The OED has an 1871 citation for this meaning (which is still pretty recent in the history of the word, obviously, but less so than I'd begun to think from enjoying the righteous disdain of your posts).

Surprised to see that the sense of "the preferable part of anything, the 'pick', 'flower', élite" is so much older (1494 citation).

I had never thought about this. Maybe it springs from people saying "Good choice!", which originally meant "Good decision", but slipped in people's minds and became attached to the actual thing they chose.

Now I'm thinking about it, the OED says, "8. An ALTERNATIVE: used both in the exact and the loose senses of that word, i.e. of the terms between which one may choose, or a term which may be chosen."

"Used" seems somewhat redundant in a dictionary, and then there's "loose"; "well, we must be descriptivist, but darling, isn't it vulgar?"

"when the choice (as in 4) still exists - i.e. you have a choice between the white couch and the blue couch - they have NOT BEEN CHOSEN YET, therefore are not eligible for defn 3b!"

you can talk about them as potential choices.

i.e. "that might make a good choice" yes; "which choice should we go for" no

ahh ok now i am with you

high fives all around!

Hmm, I don't know about that. "You have two choices: you can either do x or do y." Is that use of "choice" wrong there, since the choice has yet to be taken? And yet it sounds OK to me...

But you hear old posh waiters in bowties saying "Excellent choice, sir," and if anyone would know the correct usage, they would.

yes Zelda i'm saying that is wrong - you have ONE choice: you can do either x or y - that is the choice in front of you

which is backed up by the common expression "i've got no choice" i.e. "i only have ONE option"

Not entirely convinced. My Shorter Oxford has as definition no. 3: "That which is chosen or to be chosen." That fits with "you have 2 choices: x or y". "You have one choice: x or y" doesn't sound right to me, it would have to be "you have a choice between x and y."

But you hear old posh waiters in bowties saying "Excellent choice, sir," and if anyone would know the correct usage, they would.

I don't think Tracer would have any problem with that. The choice (ie. decision) they made was exellent.

I hate the compulsion I feel to correct my typos on this thread.

"fingerfuck" or "finger-fuck"?

First one noun, second one verb.

Maybe both ways one word. Depends on your mood.

"fingerfoc"

http://www.discogs.com/release/130054

I don't think Tracer would have any problem with that. The choice (ie. decision) they made was exellent.

Ah, I think I get it now.

Obviously the heading "When and what is at risk?" is no good but what would be an elegant rewrite?

'what is at risk, and when?' is grammatiwockle, but maybe not elegant. if it's just a heading, why not just 'what is at risk?'

the 'when' part is kind of implied i think (immediacy being part of the overall risk).

SEZ U

ok how bout just "OMG RISKS?!!?!"

^^^^^^^ THAT

(the nyt has used both OMG and LOL in headlines in recent months, even though i can't find any mention of them in the style book)

Unrelated editing and life-in-general note: I hate the phrase

equal opportunity offender

because it is meaningless and stupid and lame and the underlying concept is basically bullshit.

(also because, in this case, it's missing a hyphen)

yes and it's generally deployed in defense of some asshole's assholishness. sometimes seen in the company of "not worried about political correctness."

Tracer, I'm with you on the choice thing - it's bugged me for ages.

I know we've had this before: "A panel of experts answer your questions..."

answers, collectively, right?