ATTN: Copyeditors and Grammar Fiends

technically it was a webinar

Yes. Exciting news.

I'm not certain that "If you might say it, then it's acceptable in writing" is true. I'm pretty certain that "If you might say it, then it's good enough for the LRB" is false - and Mark S seems to agree with that. But, further, I don't think I would say these things (the sentences that I find bad) aloud anyway.

It's true that the original LRB example is different from my then invented example about Mark S. But still:

I once asked Mark S about his piano, who had written an article about it for The Wire.

I would be amazed if the editor of a publication allowed this through - and indeed I would be disappointed if a writer submitted it. (People too often complain nowadays about a lack of editors: writers have responsibilities too.) I'm a bit surprised if Alba, who I believe has an extensive background in journalism, thinks it is OK - for a publication rather than a sentence uttered over your 4th pint.

Objectively, it may be said that Tóibín's piece met the editorial standards of the LRB, because an LRB editor passed on it.

I don't know about that. Surely an individual may fail to meet or enforce the standards of the institution that employs them?

Rare is the copy without error.

This is not America. This is not what America does.

I don't know about that. Surely an individual may fail to meet or enforce the standards of the institution that employs them?

Hey, hey, LRB, how many rules did you break, Tóibín?

are editors agents of fascism as a rule

I've realised I'm totally a pinefox when it comes to other things. Like, I can't stand to see something like "anti-money laundering measures" because the hyphen is only attached to one of the two words, so it reads like it means laundering operations against money. Even though normal people's brains will see "money laundering" as a unit and not make a problem of this. But I'd always rather "anti-money-laundering operations".

It’s been a hot minute since I did this, but isn’t an en-dash used where you have a multi-word construction that needs to be hyphenated? Or is that super–old school?

no school older

Hardcore, that is what I learned as well.

Possibly discussed before (and I wonder if I once read this in a Guardian Style Guide) ... but shouldn't "impacted" only be used about ... teeth??

Like most "should/shouldn't" formulations, it depends entirely on the circumstances. If you are writing an article or news story in the Guardian, then by all means, follow their Style Guide's guidance. In casual conversation or writing, not so much.

Thanks Aimless. It's not in the context of the Guardian ... it's just one of those words that has stuck in my head as "don't use it".

ftr, it's not weird that you thought that: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/yes-impact-is-a-verb

impact has been used as a verb for hundreds of years and it's totally fine to use it and not just of teeth

not only is it entirely normal on english for nouns to become verbs (and vice versa)*, it's also good (it's a root of english poetic effect)

*in this instance impact was a verb before it was a noun and that's also normal and good

Yes for me the only should/shouldn't opinion that matters is the opinion of the person approving my invoice, approving my timesheet, or signing my paycheck.

Like almost every professional word-using person I have aesthetic opinions about usage. They don't rise to normative or moral judgments. They are matters of taste; de gustibus etc.

When I work for people who have strong views on usage, I adhere to their views. Because that is how I pay my fricking mortgage.

Okay about “impact” as a verb but what about the knotweed that is “impactful”?

it has a decipherable meaning so it is a word. but some words cannot be admitted into polite company, such as the dictionary, or used in any form of writing, with the possible exception of emails sent by one marketer to another.

I don't see much problem with that adjective.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/impactful-is-a-real-word

there's nothing wrong with it at all obviously

why is this in the copy-editors and grammar fiends thread lol

keep this nonsense to the worst thread on ilx plz

Link plz.

Just got a robocall from work about today’s subway shooting saying I should contact someone if I “have been impacted” so I guess you win.

17th century usage says HULLO

Doesn't it go back a trifle further? Couldn't find it in my KJV or Complete Shakespeare though.

i mean yes, it does back to latin: impingo impingere impegi impactum so i guess the romans also say HULLO or SALVE as they wd put it

Have you tried the Duolingo Latin yet?

ILXegitimi non carborundum

Okay if you want to accept “impactful” but don’t pretend it came from Cicero: https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2019/04/impactful.html.

It made its OED debut in 2018, along with “jumbotron.” https://public.oed.com/updates/new-words-list-june-2018/

I almost used “debut” as a transitive verb but thought better of it, not wanting to stir things further.

Which I guess would've been okay today but Oxford sez exp North American, business: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/debut_2

debut is fine as a transitive verb

also this nonsense belongs on "words and phrases (good) that annoy me (bad)"

Yes, I believe you have made this impactful point several times about this “nonsense” regarding people’s folk opinions as to usage, but are sure that is the right thread to banish it to? Maybe it should more properly be on Noize Board thread about Britishes vs. US(age).

no, it is not fine as a transitive verb. If I were a copy-editor I would cross it out and replace it with "launch"

xp

i am a copy editor

whether i replaced it would of course depend on context but it's fine

'Debuted' as a word in English is odd because you wouldn't pronounce the last letters - or, if you like, you'd pronounce it 'Debu'd' ie: omit the te.

I don't say that this makes it invalid or that other English words don't have silent letters.

I just reflect that this fact about 'Debuted' might add to people's resistance to it if they see it as a new word. It's perhaps a bit awkward.

On reflection I don't think I would use it, but I'm also not going to complain if others use it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwyTrWJ7Djw

Your debutante just knows what you need etc iirc

this is a weird exchange to read as an American

Your debutante just knows what you need but your arsenal, well that’s a horse of a different color.

Xp: because?

Debut as a transitive verb is completely normal here, and I had no idea it wasn't in the UK. So the idea that "it is not fine as a transitive verb" or it's "odd" and people might struggle with guessing how to pronounce it is itself odd to me. nbd, just a little funny, like americans losing their minds in a roundabout or something

It’s completely normal in the UK too. Funnily enough I just edited a piece containing it.

Maybe this thread should be restyled as

TS Copyeditors vs. Grammar Fiends FITE!

where "fiend" is in the sense of
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lae8FewbnuU

HOW DU I SHOT Capitalization Rules for Headlines