guys i am actually an official copyeditor again one of many not-so-harsh realities dawning on me today
-- rrrobyn, Tuesday, November 6, 2007 12:16 PM (Tuesday, November 6, 2007 12:16 PM) Bookmark Link
Welcome back to the club.
― Pleasant Plains, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 18:55 (sixteen years ago) link
You wouldn't believe how much dead Latin I'm forced to remove.
― Pleasant Plains, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 18:56 (sixteen years ago) link
I just changed "daylight savings time" to "Daylight Saving Time" in a piece of copy.
― jaymc, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 23:45 (sixteen years ago) link
(I found precedent for it in the archives, which isn't too surprising, since we use British spellings for words like "colour" and "centre," too.)
― jaymc, Tuesday, 6 November 2007 23:47 (sixteen years ago) link
SMALLBRAIN WRITER ALERT!
"The series, which ended last month, took on a similar format to last year's Popstar Idol."
took on a format?
was IN a similar format?
was OF a similar format?
It all seems so wrong.
― Zoe Espera, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:29 (sixteen years ago) link
"...was made/produced/planned/etc in a similar format..." I think you need a verb in there.
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:32 (sixteen years ago) link
What about "took on a format similar to"?
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:32 (sixteen years ago) link
jaymc, where are you from again? that it's surprising that you use british precedent?
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:33 (sixteen years ago) link
Or just strike the "on" and say "...took a form similar to that of last year's Popster Idol."
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:33 (sixteen years ago) link
why not just "took on a similar format similar to last year's Popstar Idol"
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:34 (sixteen years ago) link
oops xpost, i am stupid.
I'm from Chicago. What is British precedent? The reason I changed it like that is that "to" was bothering me -- I was wondering whether it should be "as" -- and then I realized that it would sound OK if it was closer to "similar."
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:34 (sixteen years ago) link
And actually, Laurel is right: it should be "similar to that of."
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:35 (sixteen years ago) link
I was just wondering where you were that it was worth mentioning "we use British spellings for words like "colour" and "centre," too." I sort of assumed you were in the UK, so I didn't see why you'd mention that (i assume everyone's British, weirdly).
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:36 (sixteen years ago) link
-- jaymc, Tuesday, November 6, 2007 11:47 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link
dude he was talking about this xpost
― n/a, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:37 (sixteen years ago) link
Thanks all! I went for "took on a format similar to that of "
but the addition of a verb would have been good too, I think.
― Zoe Espera, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:41 (sixteen years ago) link
Oh. Duh. I work for a certain encyclopedia founded in Scotland in 1768. I think we use British spellings for traditional reasons -- although there are some products, like the children's edition, in which they're not used.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:42 (sixteen years ago) link
you mean WEE BAIRNS' EDITION
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:43 (sixteen years ago) link
It's actually changed names so many times, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the next one.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:44 (sixteen years ago) link
i'm not sure if it's ironic that i didn't know what encyclopedia you were referring to, so i looked it up on wikipedia.
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:46 (sixteen years ago) link
Haha.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:50 (sixteen years ago) link
Simple:
The series, which ended last month, had a similar format to last year's Popstar Idol.
Unless you mean it "took on" a similar format midway through the series.
― Eyeball Kicks, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:50 (sixteen years ago) link
Urgh I disagree! "a similar format to" strikes me as a grammar wreck. "a format similar to that of" does not.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 17:52 (sixteen years ago) link
That's a British form, we don't say "a similar format to" any more than we say "a different format to". Here the rule is "better than"/"different from".
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:01 (sixteen years ago) link
what about "as"? almost seems right
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:09 (sixteen years ago) link
Similar AS? You've been an ex-pat for too long.
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:11 (sixteen years ago) link
U same as crazy.
Anyway the "similar" is ye olde red herring, you could just say "like that of" and be clearer.
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:13 (sixteen years ago) link
The "of" is kind of essential to the meaning, even though nobody will care. It doesn't mean the format is similar to Popstar Idol, the whole show; it means the format is similar to the format of Popstar Idol. Hence "similar to that of."
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:18 (sixteen years ago) link
Also while on a tangent, Americans do NOT say "bored of". We say "bored WITH". Fun with prepositions!!
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:21 (sixteen years ago) link
Or maybe "bored BY", now that I think of it. But never "of".
American English differs from English English, which differs to Scottish English, which differs by Australian English, which differs through New Zealand English, which differs under Northern Irish English, which differs between Welsh English
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:28 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm sure some Americans say bored of!
― Will M., Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:29 (sixteen years ago) link
Will, are you an American? Sorry, haven't noticed...
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:30 (sixteen years ago) link
I suppose it's possible that there's some weird pocket of "bored of" in the same way that New Yorkers wait "on line", but it is deeply weird to average USian sensibilities. We do not, as a rule, say "bored of".
― Laurel, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:31 (sixteen years ago) link
i always just try to limit the number of prepositions in any sentence
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:32 (sixteen years ago) link
they will screw you every time
will is cdn! mtl even!
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:33 (sixteen years ago) link
J'ai ennui DE ca.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:38 (sixteen years ago) link
ca m'emmerde!! (no prepositions!)
― Tracer Hand, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:41 (sixteen years ago) link
sorry, i read that as "that's my shit!"
― nabisco, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:43 (sixteen years ago) link
This suggests that it's not particularly British either: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000636.html
― jaymc, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:46 (sixteen years ago) link
prepositions are kinda the bane of my french
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:46 (sixteen years ago) link
the other bane of my french is being a lazy anglo pigdog of course
― rrrobyn, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:47 (sixteen years ago) link
Yeah, that's right -- I sloppily didn't even look at the rest of the sentence. My suggestion was just to use "had" in place of the other more awkward expressions.
― Eyeball Kicks, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:54 (sixteen years ago) link
I would have said "followed a format similar to".
― Alba, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:57 (sixteen years ago) link
Maybe I wouldn't have. I don't know now.
― Alba, Wednesday, 7 November 2007 18:58 (sixteen years ago) link
I'm having a hard time with these sentences:
1. "You are a bigger man than me." vs. 2. "You are a bigger man than I."
I saw the second written, and thought it was incorrect, but now that I think about it, I suppose that "am" is implied in the second sentence. Can anyone explain not only which sentence is better, but WHY? I am really confused as to why both a subject and an object work (albeit in different ways) within the EXACT same structure.
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:18 (sixteen years ago) link
Oh sorry I didn't respond Laurel, btw, I guess I accidentally stopped following the thread. I am Canadian, but I know several Americans. I'm sure that one of them might say bored of... but I might be thinking of myself, who is not American. Then again, I still say "on accident" instead of "by accident" which apparently REALLY bothers people (probably because it's so wrong and ugly-sounding)
― Will M., Friday, 9 November 2007 15:20 (sixteen years ago) link
Will, I think only #2 is actually correct (for exactly the reason you say: "...than I am"), but everyone uses #1 colloquially so it's what you expect to hear.
― Laurel, Friday, 9 November 2007 15:24 (sixteen years ago) link