ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

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.

how about "this data translates" vs "these data translate"

Guardian style guide says

data
takes a singular verb; like agenda, strictly a plural, but no one ever uses "agendum" or "datum"

which is even more liberal than it used to be; it used to say something like "the battle over data being a plural is now lost", which at least conceded that it was once a contentious issue. And I think that scientific publications might still go the traditional route but yeah, for everyone else data is now a mass noun, so "this".

What do this/these data translate to? If it's a single conclusion or result or whatever, then the singular makes even more sense to me, on the logic of a one-to-one translation: X means Y.

i gen agree.

I saw "datum" in print last week and was momentarily amazed.

is the word "actress" as anachronistic in 2007 as "comedienne"? It seems odd to me to see, say, Diana Rigg referred to as "an actor". Am I over-reacting?

Read a bit in the Grauniad where it said that "actress" still had some uses, gave the example of some not gay chap's obit where it said "he developed an interest in young actors".

My latest peeve word—"rationality." Uh, you mean "reason?" My BP and I have been using it as often as possible, appending even more syllables.

Calling women "actors" seems forced to me, too, but my very good friend who is a lady actor does it, and she's a huge grammar stickler.

A hate the way "waitress" and "waiter" are being subsumed by "server."

xxpost, cf. v. burglarize from n. burglar from v. burgle.

And "massage therapist" ascends because nobody can figure out that a "masseuse" is a gal and a "masseur" is a guy.

And, I guess, v. orientate from n. orient from v. orient.

And, a moment of silence for "stewardess."

aksherly both burgle and burglarize come from burglar - so burgle is a back formation and arguably less correct than burglarize.

how about actorette?

My BP
Oops. MR BP.

Is "dominatrix" the only "-trix" that's survived (while "aviatrix," "editrix," etc., have disappeared)?

And "massage therapist" ascends because nobody can figure out that a "masseuse" is a gal and a "masseur" is a guy.

whoa hold up, they're not the same thing! my sister is a (qualified) massage therapist, but i can tell you in no uncertain terms she is not a "masseuse" and she will kick the puny ass of anyone who calls her one! (trust me on this)

Oh, sorry. I don't want to get all those massage therapists mad at me, because the sad truth is, my ass IS puny.
I love the verb "burgle."
The good thing about moving toward gender-neutral job titles is that you can trot out the gender-specific ones when you want to be catty.

burglarise/ize is american isn't it? i don't remember ever having seen it in a uk publication.

When did people start saying 'in agreeance' instead of 'in agreement'? It just doesn't seem cromulent.

yep. Burglarize and burgle were both coined around the same time, late 19th century. xp.

xpost Since 1540?

I have a question on the usage of “says x”. E.g.:

Says Joe Scatterbrain, “We must fight them over there so that we don’t have to fight them over here.”

I think it looks ugly as sin, but I have encountered quite a few good writers employing it. Is it acceptable in formal writing?

Beth: "server" is in many places being usurped in turn by "waitron"!!

(or is it the other way around?)

and pronunciation freaks: is it "way tron" or "way truhn"?

http://bartelby.com/61/8/W0010850.html

do ppl actually say waitron, Godfrey Daniel!

I have a question on the usage of “says x”. E.g.:

Says Joe Scatterbrain, “We must fight them over there so that we don’t have to fight them over here.”

I think it looks ugly as sin, but I have encountered quite a few good writers employing it. Is it acceptable in formal writing?

-- Jeb, Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:43 PM

It's an affectation, surely, to put the "Says" before both the quote and the speaker? I don't mind it, and it's certainly not incorrect per se, but it's arguably archaic.

That would be changed in any US publication, says I