ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

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

Morbs a friend of mine in the restaurant business says it as a matter of course

Ok, thanks.

That would be changed in any US publication, says I

I saw it being used in a Slate article a couple of days ago, actually.

I think it's sort of colloquial-sounding but not wholly incorrect.

hahaha Slate doesn't count!

The plural form of BBS. BBSes? BBSs? What say you?

BBSs

Definitely “BBSs.” Same thing as with the DVD discussion earlier in this thread; some style guides (most notably NY Times’) go for DVD’s (BBS’s), but most recommend just adding an “s,” DVDs (BBSs).

I am SHOCKED that ANY style guide calls for an apostrophe for the plural of an abbreviation! That is crazy talk!

I dunno, even the hyper-sensitive Lynn Truss chalks that one up to 'usage'.

even the apostrophe-averse AP uses it for plurals of single characters: mind your P's and Q's. because Ps and Qs looks odd. (but yes, DVDs, SUVs, STDs...)

I don't think Ps looks that odd. Is and Os and the other vowels look very odd though. I suppose you could do "I"s and "O"s.

while this thread is active, i'm curious to what degree anyone is aware of copyediting being outsourced or back-officed. i wrote a book for a small publisher earlier this year, and they shipped it to india for proofing and copyediting (not for substance -- the editors here did that -- but for basic typos and style issues). the indian editors did a fine job, caught a lot of small mistakes. but is this a widespread practice? are there copyediting shops popping up like there are call centers and coding shops? since it's what i actually get paid to do, it makes me a little nervous.

I used to work for a textbook development firm, and we basically did proofreading, fact-checking, and design for large textbook publishers, as well as other publishing outfits. (Part of how I got hired at my current company was that we were briefly a client of my old company and so I already had experience with one of the projects.) I don't know how much straight-up copyediting took place, but it doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility.

In this case, I think the advantage was that the work was done quickly and reliably, when the publishers didn't have the time or the staff to do it themselves. Outsourcing the work to India makes me think that there's a financial motivation, though, as well.

oh yeah i'm sure the indian copyeditors make a lot less than american copyeditors do.

I wrote into AP and asked my BBS plural question, and they said:

Probably BBSes. If you are abbreviating bulletin board systems for computers, suggest use the more understandable, if longer, bulletin boards.

My favourite part: "Probably." Thanks, AP's ask the editor. Thanks for your decisiveness.

I frequently write in margins "probably..." or "I'd suggest..." which should be understood as "there is no right or wrong here unless you pay me far more to rewrite the whole piece cos even when I fix the obvious errors it will still be gibberish".

In most questions like the BBS one, sadly, the answer does not matter.

I'd have said BBSs, out of the two choices. But BBSes gets used often enough that I wouldn't care much. "Bulletin boards" is better, though, if that's what you mean.

Probably BBSes.

Kisss
Boxs
Gass

That's your where/why.

are there copyediting shops popping up like there are call centers and coding shops?

i feel like there was an article about this on the bbc or somewhere, with the answer being "yes," although i recall hearing about it more in the context of major multinationals (i.e. Citigroup or Dow Jones, say, moving these parts of their operations there, or parts of these parts, i guess) rather than indepedent "shops."

Probably BBSes

absolutely BBSes. i mean ... do none of you remember the fucking pertuises?

but really, that isn't an argument i want to go through again. ever.

(hmm: not sure how i've managed to anchor that link halfway down the thread. meant to start at the top, obviously.)

Some questions about a teacher's edits to a s1ght and sound piece:

1. She circled the phrase 'by that t0ken' and called it a cliche. Do you agree or disagree?
2. "Cust0dians work dilig3ntly during the night sh1ft, mopping the d1rty halls before the m0rning teenagers arriv3." She circled "work dilig3ntly" and put 'show.' Really?
3. "3ducation continues to burr0w its way into the m1nds of students" She wrote: "Why are you using personification?" Thoughts?
4. "She makes her way to a wat3r fountain, pushes th3 tab and gorg3s" She circled 'makes her way' and wrote "What is blocking her?" ^^

I have more, but I'll leave it at this.

Without the context of the whole piece it's hard to say... #1 seems nitpicky, #2 has some merit, 'diligently' seems a little lazy, #3 is way OTM, wtf is that bro, #4 seems dubious as you have to kind of make your way to most water fountains.