ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (5060 of them)
i noticed that about THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY too. kinda pretentious.

having fun with stockholm cindy on stage (Jody Beth Rosen), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:27 (eighteen years ago) link

I live in fear of the split infinitive.

Lara (Lara), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:41 (eighteen years ago) link

The Beatles = title of LP (if they have an LP called this): cap it if it's a house-style alternative to italics or being put in quotes.
the Beatles = name of band (haha arguable exception: the The) -- we don't italicise the names of rock bands or put them in quotes so I don't see why we should let them colonise the surrounding parts of speech which don't belong to them. I once got into a fight doing a catalogue for a gallery -- long since gone bust -- which not only insisted that they spelled themselves w.a cap 'T' for the but that you had to put TWO SPACES between the 'the' and the bit of their name that actually was theirs. I call this cheek -- and I told them that the page-layout software would strip out the spcaes automatically, which was a total lie HURRAH.

widely ignored convention in the UK is that you don't cap the 'the' for newspapers EXCEPT The Times

in Ken's counter-example it shd be "butcher's shop" (or just "butcher's" or indeed "butcher"), unless it is a single shop in which a number of butchers trade independently, in which case "butchers' shop" (as per grimly) or "butchers shop" (as per martin) are equally good. I prefer the second bcz i wish to strip the lil bleeder aht of everyfing i hate it so

It's true that -- when stand-alone -- "A man jerks off their own penis" emphasises the sense of a generalised rule more than ""A man jerks off his own penis" or even "The man jerks off his own penis" but frankly it's never going to BE stand-alone, and context will (well, should) do the work of revealing which is meant. ALSO: It is a rule easily falsified.

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:42 (eighteen years ago) link

the ile page-layout software stripped out that 'the' automatically

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:43 (eighteen years ago) link

if it's cap T they are claimin TOSU is a title so we shd refer to them as "the The Ohio State University" whenever they come up in a sentence...

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:47 (eighteen years ago) link

actually you never say "outside the butcher" unless possibly when referrin to eg a porkchop not consumed

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:48 (eighteen years ago) link

Mark, the Beatles do indeed have an LP called that, but going by the cover typography it should be notated as The BEATLES!

Also it's worse than that, Mark, the school is actually asking that you refer to them -- mid-sentence -- as The Ohio State University. With the cap. (The one thing you can say to their credit is that they're a business, and businesses have been known to do much nit-pickier things in the creation of brand image and the protection of trademarks. There are still all kinds of weird things where a business, say, capitalizing one letter in a product name would actually violate someone else's service-marked product name, or whatever.)

I am trying to think of an exception/example where a non-quote non-ital title really does manage to successfully claim its article. There's surely something.

I recently ran something where I wanted to describe a band as being in tune with the demographic of (ahem) the publication titled The Wire, but the editor changed my usage -- "Wire-friendly" -- to the more proper "The Wire-friendly." (I'm not sure if, per CMOS, you'd use an n-dash in that latter forumation.)

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:50 (eighteen years ago) link

Also, ha, shocking: looking upthread, it appears that Jaymc had been complaining about my adverbs for like 9 good months before I noticed.

nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:56 (eighteen years ago) link

He's a patient one, that Jaymc.

Laurel (Laurel), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:57 (eighteen years ago) link

Hahaha.

jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:58 (eighteen years ago) link

The Wire is a bit of a special case as for a long period it was really actually just called Wire -- the 'the' was officially dropped (I think bcz the then-designer got fed up with it messing up his nice pages) then put back on again!!

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 22:58 (eighteen years ago) link

a reason for saying "The Wire-friendly" is so as not to confuse it with the hyphenate adjective for being accessible to the band Wire...

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 23:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Sight and Sound used to insist on spelling a film exactly the way it appeared in the title sequence: hence Se7en, —Only Angels Have Wings etc, except this did NOT apply eg to KING KONG. The rule began to soften a bit after Fargo, which doesn't actually have a strict title sequence, just a series of datelines (tho the dep ed at the time did exaperatedly argue that we should call it -- alone in the the world -- Fargo: 8.12am, Wed 12 Dec (or whatever the first one is); and then after the ed actually called Terry Gilliam to ask if it wz 12 Monkeys (as per film i think) or Twelve Monkeys (as per poster and ad material), and Gilliam said "I don't know! It doesn't matter!"

I kinda miss Se7en: other mag started doing it for a while, even when we'd stopped. S&S still omits the colon implied by the line break, which I hate eg Robin Hood Prince of Thieves

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 23:09 (eighteen years ago) link

"this did NOT apply eg to KING KONG": i mean we didn't go with all caps even if the title sequence did

mark s (mark s), Monday, 6 February 2006 23:10 (eighteen years ago) link

For some reason that Terry Gilliam tale made me laugh and laugh.

Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 00:21 (eighteen years ago) link

(and made me want a job at Sight & Sound)

Alba (Alba), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 00:24 (eighteen years ago) link

Help: the Beatles, or The Beatles?

I thought this said, "the Beatles or The Beetles?" and laughed. 'Hoo boy, nobody's made that joke since 1963...oh wait.'

Abbott (Abbott), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 02:23 (eighteen years ago) link

pixel farmer (Rock Hardy), Tuesday, 7 February 2006 03:23 (eighteen years ago) link

one month passes...
Haha, I just noticed that CHUCK EDDY is quoted in a recent (Oct/Nov) issue of Copy Editor! He's a source for the usage of the new word "reggaeton" -- although it credits his quote ("Sometimes I think I'm the only person around who likes the idea of reggaeton better than the actual music") as "Village Voice."

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:00 (eighteen years ago) link

There's a magazine for copy editors?

The Milkmaid (82375538-A) (The Milkmaid), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:07 (eighteen years ago) link

I have their n-dash centerfold hanging above my bed.

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:09 (eighteen years ago) link

It's a newsletter. It gets passed around the office with one of those sheets on top with everyone's name on it, and you cross yours out before handing it to the dude in the cubicle next to yours.

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:11 (eighteen years ago) link

That sounds really old-school. Old school?

The Milkmaid (82375538-A) (The Milkmaid), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:12 (eighteen years ago) link

Does your office have a typing pool?

The Milkmaid (82375538-A) (The Milkmaid), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:13 (eighteen years ago) link

I guess it is old school. It is an old-school practice.

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:14 (eighteen years ago) link

otm

mookieproof (mookieproof), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:14 (eighteen years ago) link

Hey, we circ PW in that fashion!

Laurel (Laurel), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:15 (eighteen years ago) link

No wait, Webster's has it hyphenated, regardless of how or where it appears in the sentence.

Although this is weird: I was convinced that "old-school" was hip-hop slang that somehow wormed its way into mainstream usage within the last ten years or so! Webster's marks its first usage as 1803!

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:17 (eighteen years ago) link

Hip-hoppers be revivin' antiquated phrases.

The Milkmaid (82375538-A) (The Milkmaid), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Important question: why would Chuck suspect he was the only one in that position w/r/t reggaeton? As far as critics go, my suspicion is that everyone feels that way.

Important statement: I've never worked anywhere that didn't route something or other in cross-it-off fashion.

More important question: where would one acquire classics of copyeditor porn, such as Sorority House Style, Cap that Ass, Stet Me Hard, Big Black Bullet Lists, and Little Non-Hyphenated Adverb/Adjective Modifiers with Big Hard Hyphens?

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Actually I think I meant Stet and Messy.

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:19 (eighteen years ago) link

some vp dude just asked me what was proper, "in route" or "in-route," and seemed offended when i said "en route"

mookieproof (mookieproof), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:27 (eighteen years ago) link

mookie that made me laugh!

quincie, Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:31 (eighteen years ago) link

I am taking an editing certification exam in, like, ten days. Thus I must go home tonight and read the painfully written Copyright chapter of Chicago. I wanna kill the guy who wrote that chapter--does anyone have a better suggestion for a quick-and-dirty way to brush up on copyright and permissions and whatnot?

quincie, Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:33 (eighteen years ago) link

Shell out for the info-cube and have it downloaded directly into yr brain. Saves LOADS of time!

Laurel (Laurel), Thursday, 9 March 2006 21:51 (eighteen years ago) link

Once our managing editor and her admin asked me to settle a spelling question: "baserk" or "bazerk"?

To my credit, I did not go berserk.

Stephen X (Stephen X), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:08 (eighteen years ago) link

My experience in the jewelry industry came in handy today regarding "carat" versus "karat." It's too bad that making the correction did not involve using a caret.

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:36 (eighteen years ago) link

Guess what I had for lunch?

nabisco (nabisco), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:37 (eighteen years ago) link

I'm not guessing. Is there an actual difference betw. "carat" and "karat"?

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:38 (eighteen years ago) link

Haha. Nice save! (XXP)

Laurel (Laurel), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:42 (eighteen years ago) link

I was going to post this as a reply to Nabisco on the "words you've never heared" thread, but it belongs here:

>Elaine: People go to South America.
>Jerry: Yeah, and they come back with things taped to their large intestine.

I suppose Jerry gets a free pass, since Elaine used the plural subject "people," not him, but note that damned numerical disagreement that keeps bugging me lately!

-- nabisco (--...), March 9th, 2006 4:40 PM. (nabisco) (later) (link)

Srsly. I keep fixing that now that you've alerted me to it.

I also keep running into a similar agreement issue that's less egregious but still bothers me:

"Lemurs have a tail that allows them to swing through branches."

I don't like the implication that many lemurs have only one tail among them, but the alternative ("lemurs have tails") makes it less clear as to how many tails each lemur has. I change this sometimes and leave it as is when the pluralization sounds clunky, as it often does. And about a third of the time that I change it, it comes back to me stetted, anyway.

jaymc (jaymc), Thursday, 9 March 2006 22:54 (eighteen years ago) link

Arf, that's a strange one. Actually I think part of the problem there is that we no longer use the kind of Platonic structure that used to go with that sort of statement: "The lemur has a tail that allows it to swing through branches."

That structure is actually really weird, politically speaking -- it's very rationalist and essentialist! To the point where it sounds really musty and Victorian plus smacks of the kinds of essentialism that now creeps us out ("The female of the species is XXX" / "The Negro is XXX" / etc.) But then we start talking about something where essentialism is exactly what we want -- lemurs have tails! -- and the right construction has been somewhat diminished.

nabisco (nabisco), Friday, 10 March 2006 00:00 (eighteen years ago) link

Actually, half the time the articles I'm editing do use that old-fashioned structure! Which of course makes it a lot easier. But I'm guessing that's more common given the nature of my work than it would be for other people.

jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 10 March 2006 00:14 (eighteen years ago) link

Guess what I had for lunch?

http://www.moresaltplease.com/images/salt%20shaker.gif

phil d. (Phil D.), Friday, 10 March 2006 00:28 (eighteen years ago) link

big grains of it.

AaronK (AaronK), Friday, 10 March 2006 03:40 (eighteen years ago) link

I love that "The lemur has..." construction and use it all the time. I guess I should watch my back. But essentialism is the basis for all the nice non-proper nouns that allow us to talk about classes of entities. I'm loosely reminded of the joke:

An astronomer, a physicist and a mathematician were holidaying in Scotland. Glancing from a train window, they observed a black sheep in the middle of a field. "How interesting," observed the astronomer, "all Scottish sheep are black!"

To which the physicist responded, "No, no! Some Scottish sheep are black!"

The mathematician gazed heavenward in supplication, and then intoned, "In Scotland there exists at least one field, containing at least one sheep, at least one side of which is black."

Paul Eater (eater), Friday, 10 March 2006 04:47 (eighteen years ago) link

"Lemurs have a tail that allows them to swing through branches."

i'd suggest: "a/the lemur's [adjective] tail allows it to swing through branches". the adjective is important here: what's so great about this tail? i mean, badgers have tails but they can't swing through branches.

at least, i don't think they can.

i've never read the first post in this thread before. it makes me want to rip out people's eyes and eat them. there really is no fucking hope for (english-speaking) humankind.

grimly fiendish (grimlord), Friday, 10 March 2006 13:52 (eighteen years ago) link

Prehensile.
Do you mean eat the eyes or the people?

beanz (beanz), Friday, 10 March 2006 14:00 (eighteen years ago) link

both. the eyes would make a tasty starter.

grimly fiendish (grimlord), Friday, 10 March 2006 14:03 (eighteen years ago) link

in black and white, that looks much more sinister than i thought. i've offended myself :o

grimly fiendish (grimlord), Friday, 10 March 2006 14:03 (eighteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.