Yeah, you're right again about "natural-gas-fired furnace," I give on that one. But it's no evasion to insist on context as an essential element of any question about grammar outside of the narrow legalese you're talking about. Notice my second examples stands just fine. Why make an arbitrary rule pretending that it doesn't?
This thread is the first time I've ever heard of n-dashes.
― Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 00:24 (fifteen years ago) link
"The aviatrix, Amelia Earhart" looks more right to me than "Aviatrix Amelia Earhart"
(I would never drop the "The" in the first place)
But perhaps this should go to the comma roundtable
― Tracer Hand, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 01:27 (fifteen years ago) link
I think the real answer is never, ever use the word "aviatrix."
― Everything is Highlighted (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 7 October 2008 01:33 (fifteen years ago) link
"The aviatrix, Amelia Earhart" makes it sound like she's the only person who's ever been an aviatrix, though.
― jaymc, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 03:07 (fifteen years ago) link
The Aviatrix Reloaded, Amelia Earhart
― Deep House, M.D. (haitch), Tuesday, 7 October 2008 03:20 (fifteen years ago) link
This is why I said in our house style you get a lot of "a" instead of "the". Which can be annoying. You could say The troubled bank HBOS , but we have to say A troubled bank, HBOS I agree that Grimly's blood-boiling sentence is just wrong, so I don't think that's a Brit-US difference. It's just the basic point that if you set something aside in commas, the rest of the sentence has to work on its own, and no-one would consider Journalist said: "Fuck this for a lark, I'm going to make a cup of tea." to be correct.
That's why my attempt to avoid the hyphens in mum of six was wrong. (Although if you add "a", it works fine, as I said.)
However, while I accept that Megacorps chief executive Keith Mandement said ... and Actress, activist and mum-of-six Angelina Jolie are common usage, I just don't understand what's going on grammatically there, which is why I can't say whether mum of six should have hyphens or not. But why there and not with Megacorps chief executive? Is it because mum of six is a NP made up of a N plus a prepositional phrase? Whereas Megacorps chief executive is just a compound noun? What if you did it Chief executive of Megacorps Keith Mandement? No-one would hyphenate that, but the only difference is that the main noun is a compound again.
Genuinely seeking Grimly wisdom here.
― Jamie T Smith, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 09:42 (fifteen years ago) link
Back to hyphenation in adjectival phrases:
oh, my credit card issuer couldn't possibly mean it the other way, that'd be completely unfair and exploitative toward the consumer
You see, we'd do this credit-card issuer.
I think the rules are perhaps more ambiguous than Grimly is allowing. Where a compound noun is clearly recognised as a unit do you have to hyphenate it when you use it adjectivally?
In my examples, I think external debt definitely needs to be hyphenated, as it is the debt that is external (ie owed to other countries, not your own banks), but you could argue that repayment obligations is a compound noun, that you are then modifying, although I went with the all-hyphens approach in the end. I just think there is a lot of room between the rules for interpretation here. Or is there?
Also, where you have something in attributive position you hyphenate it, but if it's used predicatively you don't ie a high-quality piece of sub-editing but Grimly's work is very high quality .
So in my text, it actually read Two-thirds of capacity is natural gas-fired . What would you do there?
― Jamie T Smith, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 09:57 (fifteen years ago) link
But why there and not with Megacorps chief executive?
i think jaymc's explanation above is the one i'm going to cling to here ... i will try to ponder this more, but i really should be doing something else right now. bugger, this is going to bug me all day.
Where a compound noun is clearly recognised as a unit
but "clear recognition" is in the eye of the reader, not the writer. one of my tasks as a sub is to ensure that no reader needs to stop and say: hang on, i need to re-read that; it doesn't mean what i think it meant. from a psycholinguistic PoV, all sorts of things could affect the way someone's reading something -- those little bits of punctuation simply serve to make things a little more obvious.
sorry, this is a really surface-level engagement with a really interesting thread, but GAAAAH i need to crack on and be reading about the central nervous system right now :)
― toast kid (grimly fiendish), Tuesday, 7 October 2008 10:01 (fifteen years ago) link
as for this:
Two-thirds of capacity is natural gas-fired
two-thirds of capacity is natural-gas-fired
OR
two-thirds of capacity is fired by natural gas
― toast kid (grimly fiendish), Tuesday, 7 October 2008 10:02 (fifteen years ago) link
no-one would consider "Journalist said: 'Fuck this for a lark, I'm going to make a cup of tea.'" to be correct.
That's because the definite article has been spuriously omitted from the original example. Add back in the "The" that should have been there in the first place and it's fine.
― Tracer Hand, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 11:05 (fifteen years ago) link
OTM. We've prohibited the use of that preceding "The" for precisely this reason - it's journalese and horrible.
― CharlieNo4, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 11:30 (fifteen years ago) link
Whaaa? Omitting the article is journalese - in no other context would it even be countenanced.
"I urged secretary Margaret Peener to fax the documents immediately."
― Tracer Hand, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 12:11 (fifteen years ago) link
An odd thing about this thread (in which I have not really participated, I don't think) is that it deals in such utter precision with sentence structures, punctuation, etc, to an extent that is often beyond me and makes me feel like a grammatical amateur or incompetent ... but it is so radically untypical of the rest of the world (not least the online world), in which I often feel like one of the few people I know who writes properly.
― the pinefox, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 12:16 (fifteen years ago) link
(Journalist) Grimly Fiendish's examples upthread, using him / herself as self-deprecating case study, are smashing!
― the pinefox, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 12:18 (fifteen years ago) link
It is in the eye of the beholder, and the rules change accordingly. I would write "credit card issuer" because the percentage that would misunderstand that is so small, and most eyes read "credit card" as one word, and a hyphen adds noise. That's the only real argument against hyphens: noise. You can add all the (white) noise you want to legal writing. The faster you put somebody to sleep in that case the better.
Re: "a high-quality piece of sub-editing" vs. "Grimly's work is very high quality"--maybe the latter reads as short for "Grimly's work is of a high quality," and so works without a hyphen, where "The concert had a low turnout" becomes "the concert was low-turnout."
― Pete Scholtes, Tuesday, 7 October 2008 18:42 (fifteen years ago) link
Not quite as vituperative as those Coren emails, but:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/oct/10/sundayexpress.pressandpublishing
― sufferin' (sktsh), Friday, 10 October 2008 14:55 (fifteen years ago) link
that. is. fucking. BRILLIANT.
that's made my day; the fact that one executive, somewhere, still cares enough to send that e-mail out. perhaps all is not yet lost.
it's totally, totally different to coren; coren was one writer whining (albeit with some justification) about his precious copy; this is an exec doling out the beats because of what's happening to quality overall. fuck me, i would LOVE that to happen round our way.
absolutely superb.
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Saturday, 11 October 2008 15:27 (fifteen years ago) link
I sent that link (sweet music to my ears) to my husband who responded with surprise that anyone at the Express cares that they're writing complete drivel.
― Not the real Village People, Saturday, 11 October 2008 17:38 (fifteen years ago) link
That was my response too.
― Alba, Saturday, 11 October 2008 17:42 (fifteen years ago) link
Can't help but feel that the guy who sent that email would have strengthened his position by knowing what century Alexander Pope was writing in.
― Poll Wall (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 11 October 2008 18:03 (fifteen years ago) link
good point. still. heat of the moment, and all that. (there was something else i spotted and thought "hmm, maybe not" about, but it's small beer in the general scheme of things.)
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Saturday, 11 October 2008 18:08 (fifteen years ago) link
I know, it's just fun correcting the corrector.
― Poll Wall (Noodle Vague), Saturday, 11 October 2008 18:18 (fifteen years ago) link
Some islands actually do float.
― anatol_merklich, Saturday, 11 October 2008 18:33 (fifteen years ago) link
tht guy is silly
I'd have my papers in txt spk tho, if I cd
― STINKING CORPSE (cozwn), Sunday, 12 October 2008 00:58 (fifteen years ago) link
^^any chance the hrld cd trail blaze this?
― STINKING CORPSE (cozwn), Sunday, 12 October 2008 00:59 (fifteen years ago) link
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v136/primrosehill/noname.jpg
― ○◙i shine cuz i genital grind◙○ (roxymuzak), Sunday, 12 October 2008 02:00 (fifteen years ago) link
En-dashes are awesome.
― Casuistry, Sunday, 12 October 2008 02:31 (fifteen years ago) link
itht guy is silly
why?
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Sunday, 12 October 2008 11:39 (fifteen years ago) link
while he is correct in what he says (he is a grammar/quality nazi, they are often correct in what they say and often have that male obsession with being right), a lot of the errors he points out are still perfectly communicative. ie readers wd get the gist, which is all I want from newspaper copy; I'm not close reading it
the capitalisation and headline setting stuff is pretty poor and shd have been picked up by eye
I can see and empathise with the larger point that the small stuff is symptomatic of a larger decline in quality and that newspapers need to sweat these details, even tho the ship is sinking
pt of me tho thinks the ship is sinking, let's sink the ship; but then I'm a wapper
― STINKING CORPSE (cozwn), Sunday, 12 October 2008 12:33 (fifteen years ago) link
^^also I think everything is silly and don't care about anything bcs I am internet dumb, innit
― STINKING CORPSE (cozwn), Sunday, 12 October 2008 12:34 (fifteen years ago) link
ie readers wd get the gist, which is all I want from newspaper copy
you're an easy man to please, though ;)
yeh, this is absolutely it. newspapers have fucked themselves in a variety of interesting ways: although part of me says, fuck 'em, life's too short for me to dick around with this nonsense any more, the fact remains that, right now and for the forseeable future, they're going to be paying my bills. so i have a vested interest in keeping the ship above the waterline for as long as possible.
if traditional print-media sources are going to adapt and survive in any way, their USP has to be quality. what else can a professional newsroom offer the reader? sadly, few of us seem to give a flying fuck about that any more -- i guess that's why, despite the myriad quibbles one could have with this dude's e-mail, i absolutely fucking love him for it. (and i get the impression that, whoever he is, he'd love to be quibbled with.)
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Sunday, 12 October 2008 12:57 (fifteen years ago) link
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/93/269167734_a4c28150f5.jpg?v=0
xp accompanying article to that memo says that Daily and Sunday Expess have since decided to, er, sack more than half of their subs.
― sktsh, Sunday, 12 October 2008 18:17 (fifteen years ago) link
a place where they still care about editing...
http://images.businessweek.com/story/08/600/0707_mindworks.jpg
― tipsy mothra, Sunday, 12 October 2008 19:15 (fifteen years ago) link
The Express titles are introducing a new Woodwing editorial system that Parrott said would allow the papers to "revolutionise the way pages are written and edited and therefore reduce costs".
It is understood that Woodwing will allow staff to write some of their stories directly on to pages, rather than send their stories to subeditors first.
when i was interviewed for a newspaper subbing job back in 1999 (or rather "page-editing" job, because, as i was repeatedly told, "we don't have subs here", even though the job was patently and obviously fucking sub-editing), this notion of "reporters writing directly into boxes" was touted to me by my interviewer as some astounding piece of futurism that would change the world as we knew it. he was rather aggrieved when i pointed out that it was nothing of the sort, and the capacity to do it had existed for several years by then.
if the express, in 2008, really believes it's some magical new direction, you've got to wonder: are they still using fucking linotype machines and blue pencils, or something?
whatever happened in the month between that memo being sent and the decision being made to axe half the subs can't have been pretty, and i have tremendous sympathy for anyone who's losing their job here (although maybe not as much sympathy as i have for anyone left behi ... no, i jest). but i also wonder, idly, about working practices in the newsroom (and not just that of the express); about the dangers of being too recalcitrant in the face of inky armageddon; and about those of my subbing brethren who don't seem to have seen the writing on the wall, which reads: "adapt or die".
actually, that may well turn out to be "adapt and die anyway", but i think that's true for newspapers in general, not just subs.
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Sunday, 12 October 2008 20:42 (fifteen years ago) link
The Nigerian proverb, "It takes a village to raise a child" can be applied...
One comma has got to be wrong -- but can I take that one out, or must I add another after child?
― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 14 October 2008 14:52 (fifteen years ago) link
Should there be one at all?
― ○◙i shine cuz i genital grind◙○ (roxymuzak), Tuesday, 14 October 2008 15:00 (fifteen years ago) link
despite the myriad quibbles one could have with this dude's e-mail, i absolutely fucking love him for it.
That's funny. For some reason I imagined the writer being female. I looked back and it doesn't specify gender.
― Alba, Tuesday, 14 October 2008 15:01 (fifteen years ago) link
xp: I would prefer there to be none
― Dr Morbius, Tuesday, 14 October 2008 15:02 (fifteen years ago) link
Nigerian proverb should have no commas. If it were "A Nigerian proverb", commas would be needed, obviously. But here no way.
Express email very good. Clearly some padding, but still. I see "fewer than one in five voters" ALL THE TIME.
― Eyeball Kicks, Tuesday, 14 October 2008 17:00 (fifteen years ago) link
For some reason I imagined the writer being female.
Aye, a bloke wouldn't quibble over "battle tank".
― Cool Hand Tiller (onimo), Tuesday, 14 October 2008 17:12 (fifteen years ago) link
That's funny. For some reason I imagined the writer being female. I looked back and it doesn't specify gender
good point. i obviously identify with them too much ;)
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Wednesday, 15 October 2008 08:00 (fifteen years ago) link
this should be easy. i'm no editor, but i've been asked to proofread a long document and i keep coming up against passages like this:
"To help keep young people in the province and to attract newcomers to the province there is a strong need to look at..."
ami i wrong in thinking there should e a comma after each "province" there? i feel like there should be, but sentence after sentence is like this...i do realize that the whole thing can be reworded so the the word province is there only once, among all sorts of other issues (passive voice, etc.).
― rent, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 16:25 (fifteen years ago) link
Commas aren't required unless "and to attract newcomers to the province" is treated as a parenthetical thought.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 16:28 (fifteen years ago) link
thanks! "aren't required" -- is it a matter of preference? like, if the sentence just feels unwieldy and confusing would it be incorrect to insert commas (even if neither clause is meant to seem parenthetical)?
― rent, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 16:38 (fifteen years ago) link
If you want to use commas to make it seem less unwieldy, I'd do so only after the second "province." In fact, that's probably a good idea, anyway.
― jaymc, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 16:42 (fifteen years ago) link
thanks, that helps & makes sense. i'll return to my endless blocks of comma-less words.
― rent, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 17:00 (fifteen years ago) link
How did I miss that Express thing???
that. is. fucking. BRILLIANT.that's made my day; the fact that one executive, somewhere, still cares enough to send that e-mail out. perhaps all is not yet lost.it's totally, totally different to coren; coren was one writer whining (albeit with some justification) about his precious copy; this is an exec doling out the beats because of what's happening to quality overall. fuck me, i would LOVE that to happen round our way.absolutely superb.― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Saturday, 11 October 2008 16:27 (4 days ago)
― easy, lionel (grimly fiendish), Saturday, 11 October 2008 16:27 (4 days ago)
^^^this, really. several big lols and immediate forwarding to entire editorial team were the results.
(xposts) agree with jaymc - comma after second province is all that's needed, if any.
― CharlieNo4, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 17:17 (fifteen years ago) link
Thirded
Which raises point of discussion, actually. I'm crap with grammatical terminology and thus can't name them, but clauses like the beginnings of the following: In January, the candidate announced... or When questioned on the issue, a spokesman replied.... Was there a specific point where things like newspapers started dropping the comma on these? I keep noticing the NYT pushing the envelope on this -- they always leave it out on short, inconsequential ones like "last month," but I'm increasingly seeing it dropped on fairly long clauses like that, ones where it seems unbearable to me to leave it out.
― nabisco, Wednesday, 15 October 2008 18:36 (fifteen years ago) link
Please also confirm that I'm not being fussy about this: surely it's just plain glaringly awfully wrong to frame a list like this --
We will serve apples, pears, plus bananas.
Awful, yes? Must finish original series with "and" before even thinking of using a "plus," yes?
― nabisco, Thursday, 16 October 2008 22:47 (fifteen years ago) link
i think you're right in terms of how we normally speak and write, but there's no real logical reason why the quote is wrong
― metametadata (n/a), Thursday, 16 October 2008 22:56 (fifteen years ago) link