Friday, March 24, 2017

Word Wrestle #9. You Shouldn't Of. No. Really, You Shouldn't Of.

Occasionally, when I write a book review, people pick on it. 
I know, right? Like, what's with THAT?

Seriously, however...I got picked on for taking an author to task for using the construction, "I should of," "I would of," and such.

I don't believe I even was the only one to ream this person out for that construction, but one particularly persnickety reader blasted me for that, among other things she thought were "obnoxious" about my review.

(Note: when someone starts out their comment by saying, "What an obnoxious review," you're probably not going to get much credit from them.  Just sayin'.)

Her contention? "This is how people talk. So you should write it that way."
My response? "It may sound like how people talk. But it's still not how a literate writer should write it."

In truth, when we say, "I should've done ____," we often do make the words sound like "should of." It's sloppy. But, then, a lot of people's conversation is sloppy.
The point is, however, that many things that sound a certain way in speech don't get written that way in prose, and this is one of those that should NOT. 
It's wrong.
It's wrong, no matter if it's in dialogue or not.

What the speaker is saying is "I should have," in a contraction form.
That contraction is never formed with the word of.
If that's how you're forming it because you're too lazy to get it right, you ought to be called out on it. 
You form that speech pattern with an apostrophe and the "ve" at the end.
For should've.
For would've.
For could've.

And no, this isn't  being needlessly pedantic. 
And no, it's not even being needlessly precise.
It's simply trying to write the English language the way the language is normally read.
If you put in "should of," you're putting a preposition in as part of a verb, a preposition that needs an object. A noun. Not a verb.

So if you say, "I should of come," not only does it sound like you're an idiot...it'll stop an intelligent reader every time. They'll stumble over it. 

(Note I said an intelligent reader. Since half the population writes this and doesn't seem to know it's wrong in the first place, you may not get a reaction from them at all. But that's not whom I write for, and I trust it's not whom you're writing for, either.)

Bottom line? It doesn't matter whether it "sounds" like that in speech or not.
In WRITING, it still has to be written to reflect what the person is actually saying.
Which is, "I would have," "I should have," "I could have," and so on.

Frankly? If you're going to mess around with that contraction, then do it with a recognized slang form of the words: woulda, shoulda, and coulda.

Everyone knows those.
Everyone recognizes them.
And slang, boys and girls, is vastly better than illiteracy.
And an author--any author--has gotta know better.  (heh heh)

Just use an apostrophe and a "ve"...and no one gets hurt.
Is that so much to ask?

Janny

Friday, March 17, 2017

Word Wrestle #8: NOT Gonna Make You Smile

Having just discovered this, yet again, being misused in fiction...let's talk about being ORNERY.

Yeah. I know. This space for laughing. 

All personality-themed barbs aside, however, let's truly talk about "ornery." What is IS...and what it AIN'T.
And what it ISN'T...is anything funny.

Several years ago, I first encountered an author I otherwise like very much using the word "ornery" repeatedly when she should have used words like "spunky" or "sassy" or the like. She had characters teasing each other and giving each other "ornery grins."

Well, if she saw someone truly giving an ornery GRIN, she saw someone with a split personality. Because, boys and girls, that's NOT what "ornery" means.
It doesn't mean "smart-aleck."
It doesn't mean "sassy."
It doesn't mean "daring" or "joking" or "teasing."


It means, in a word, NASTY.
The definition lists synonyms like "grouchy or grumpy," "cantankerous," and even "bad- or ill-tempered," "waspish," and "irascible."
The KINDEST term for it in any dictionary I can find is a secondary definition as "stubborn."

Now, in the context that this author used it, she did not mean ANY of the things above, with the possibly exception of "stubborn." However, since nothing else in the instances she mentioned had anything to do with someone being stubborn...I can only assume she had acquired some regional misapplication of the word that resulted in using the word wrong-- one that no one had ever bothered to query, so much as correct.

Not even her editors.

And that made ME ornery to see, frankly.

All of which points back to something the CWC says with annoying and even ornery regularity:
Whatever word you choose to use...make SURE you're using it right.
Even if you think you know already, LOOK IT UP.
Even if you're "sure" you know what it means, because everyone in your extended family says it that way, LOOK IT UP.
And, for heaven's sake, if you're only approximately sure what it means, or you're not really sure at all...PLEASE. LOOK. IT. UP.

There's no excuse for using a wrong word like this, over and over, in clear conveyance that you don't know what you're talking about.
There's even less reason for an editor to let it pass by.

You're never, ever, EVER going to give someone an "ornery grin." Unless you have elastic capabilities to both your face and your temperament that, frankly, would be a little scary in real life.

And misusing "ornery" around this friendly editor...will NOT make her smile.
Which will result in a red mark on your manuscript, and not make YOU smile, either.
Use lots of words in your writing. Use all kinds of them. There are something like 600,000 words in the English language, and more are being added every day. So don't be shy. Dig right in and use 'em.

Just please, please, please, please-I-BEG-you... USE THEM RIGHT.
(And they wonder why I drink.)

Don't be ornery about it...but do be picky. If you're going to call yourself an author, picky is one of the first, last, and consistent things you ought to be anyway.
And lazy, quite frankly, is not.
Learn the difference.

Thoughts?
Janny


Sunday, March 12, 2017

The Cats Are Dancing!

FINALLY!

No, this isn't a case of actual felines tripping the light fantastic...it's much better.

It's the Northwestern Wildcats finally breaking into the NCAA Tournament, for the first time in 78 YEARS.
And yeah, it's kind of a big deal. 

GO CATS!

Friday, March 10, 2017

Word Wrestle #7: Stop Begging, Already!

OK, you may be wondering what "begging" has to do with a good old-fashioned Wrestle.
You won't wonder long, though, if you find it as irritating as I do to hear the phrase "begs the question" used the WRONG way.
ALL THE TIME.
By people who ought to know better.

Think about it. You can't go for more than a few days--or hours, depending on how much writing you read and commenting you listen to--without hearing some journalist, when presenting a query, say, "Of course, this begs the question..."
And then they proceed to ASK said question.

If this doesn't set your teeth on edge, you're either unfamiliar with one of the basic definitions of rhetoric and logic...or you think that "begging the question" is the same as "presenting" or "bringing up" a question.

Guess what?
IT'S NOT.
Not only is it not the same thing...it doesn't even come close to MEANING the same thing.

Basic logic lesson time.
"Begging the question," according to wiser minds among us, is defined as:
  
Any form of argument where the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises.  Many people use the phrase “begging the question” incorrectly when they use it to mean, “prompts one to ask the question."  That is NOT the correct usage. Begging the question is a form of circular reasoning.
(H/T to Logically Fallacious for this concise definition. Without swear words or anything. Better than I could do.)

Note that this "begging the question" aspect is a) considered an errant form of argument, and b) weak thinking on display. What it attempts to do is use a conclusion in order to argue its own premise. In other words, in shorthand, it's:
Claim X assumes X is true.
Therefore, claim X is true.

The example on Logically Fallacious is, "Paranormal activity is real because I have experienced what could only be called paranormal activity."

In order to say that anything "could only be called paranormal activity," one first has to acknowledge that paranormal activity is, in fact, a real thing. But that doesn't PROVE that it is...because in order to label your experience as such, you have to already accept as true that the thing exists and can be identified as such.

Are your eyes crossing yet?

Suffice to say that "begging the question" is a phenomenon that leaves a question, in fact, still unanswered--not something that presents or prompts a question.

So the next time you hear someone say, "This begs the question, 'How were you able to see that purple cow, anyway?'"....
Well, you probably know the response to that.
Most of us have always said we'd rather SEE than BE one.

Old rhymes aside, if you're brave enough, you'll also point out that the purple cow question isn't begging anything. Nor does the cow do any begging. 
And then, if your audience is truly paying attention...you can BEG them to stop misusing this phrase. 
And tell them why they're misusing it.

You will strike a needed blow for logic and clear expression.
And the purple cow will thank you.

Milk it!
Janny

Friday, March 03, 2017

Nothing More Needs Be Said. (Except maybe, "Grow Up.")

Leave it to Chicks on the Right, one of my favorite places, to channel this wonderfulness.

Actually, one more thing should probably be said. 

LEARN YOUR HISTORY. Because Hitler, as almost no one seems to want to point out, was a liberal socialist.

Three guesses what both Obama and Hillary are.

'nuff said.

Janny

Word Wrestle #6: What Time Was That Again?

Okay...This is actually starting to get a bit scary.

What's with people writing stories nowadays in which the tenses are all mixed up--not only in the same paragraph, but sometimes in the same SENTENCE? I've just finished skimming a potential editing project in which the author actually used past, present, and future in one sentence. And, no, they weren't talking about time travel. This was supposedly normal narrative.

When I first encountered this, I thought it was a couple of clients with bad habits and/or bad instruction. However, it's become so rampant now that I can no longer assume that. The only thing I CAN assume, therefore...is that NO ONE is teaching verb tenses in school anymore. I don't mean sketching around them, touching on them briefly, and then going on to "more interesting" things in the language. I mean NOT TEACHING THEM AT ALL.

If this is the case, WHY and HOW did this happen?

Please don't get me wrong. Slang is one thing. Informal, casual speech is one thing. But when I see a narrative sentence that says something like, "She and her brother had never ventured out of the safe area in their lives, so they don't know what they experience when they will..." and so on? This makes a reader's head hurt. Which strikes me, oh, I don't know, as something YOU DON'T WANT TO DO?

It's not DIFFICULT to learn verb tenses. In English. No. Really. It's not. In fact, it used to be common sense. It used to be that you couldn't get out of school without nailing these things. But now, it's basic error I see in manuscript after manuscript from people who think they're writing books, even people who claim those books HAVE BEEN EDITED ALREADY.

By whom? The legendary 100 monkeys with computers, allegedly writing Shakespeare?

This isn't a matter of pedantry. It's not a matter of being "picky." It's a matter of communicating clearly what you mean. And it should worry people who call themselves writers, above all. Because in this age of people taking every single word you say or write, pouncing on it, and giving it their OWN spin to paint you in negative terms...why would you be content writing anything that a) makes you look stupid, or b) is completely unintelligible?

I suppose the upside is that if everyone is equally stupid, they won't do you any lasting damage. But I'm not in a position where I'd recommend anyone take that chance.

The up side, I suppose, is that editors will be getting more work than ever. The down side, however, is that that work should be aimed at higher levels than needing to correct what should have been basic, fourth-grade grammar. 

I'm an editor. Not an elementary school teacher. I'm willing to do my job...but, apparently, there are a swackload of others who are not willing or able to do THEIRS.

And so it continues.
Pardon me while I go take a painkiller now. Or, maybe, six.

Thoughts?
Janny

Monday, February 27, 2017

Another House I Won't Be Moving Into...

Just went to see another potential "landing spot" for us yesterday. And, once again, have remembered why one should always take a real estate description with a shaker of salt.

This house's selling point, beginning and ending, it its location. It is right ON the lake, with a splendid view that, the owner tells me, features full sunsets. It has a nice deck to watch said sunsets, it has a fireplace, and it has just big enough of a yard to have space to garden without TOO much mowing to take up time and energy.

What it doesn't have, however, is much beyond that. Which includes not really having "three bedrooms," among other things.

There IS a main-floor bedroom. Positioned in an odd spot between the kitchen and the expansive living room (with the sliding doors that look out on the lake). And it's small. But it's not nearly as tiny as the two upper "bedrooms," which are basically loft spaces beneath a slanting roof. In both of them, if I walked more than six feet across the space, I would bump my head on the ceiling. And I am NOT tall. I took one look and knew that bookcases, not to mention my desk, wouldn't even begin to fit in either of them...which kind of nixes the idea of having the office upstairs, which is what a bedroom will be used for regardless of where we end up.

But the crowning achievement of this space was, in fact, what the owner called a "working kitchen." Which should have been called "a kitchen that should be a work in progress." From the front door of the home, it's what you step into immediately. To your left is a fridge. Immediately kitty-corner from the fridge are the full-size washer and dryer. Then, there's some cabinetry, and behind you is the counter with the sink. But by far the most interesting feature of this kitchen was...er...the stove. Which is wedged up against a wall that juts out, covering a tiny alcove...which contains the water heater.

In an alcove. Not a closet. Not a separate space. Just kind of "set in" there, with a stove jammed up against it. And the entire space couldn't have been more than eight feet deep.

To say that would be an unworkable kitchen, for someone like me, would be putting it kindly. Anyone who moves into this house can't possibly have "foodie" in their makeup. The arrangement doesn't give a real cook room to move, much less to create anything. And if you're doing laundry at the same time someone's trying to open the fridge...?

Ah, well. If I had that location, I'd tear down the cottage and start over.  The location is absolutely, positively, the only thing about this place that would draw someone in. But a family with actual children? Not enough space. A single, or maybe a couple who had no home office and basically no furniture, would be fine in it. If they didn't want to cook. At all. Ever. :-)

It is to sigh. But it is also to move on and work at finding the next place to land--which is still on the agenda. A place big enough to store all our stuff, hopefully still WITH a water connection. Oh, and at a low price.

Yeah, I know. But I've never been accused of dreaming small. Ever. So we press on!

How's your garden grow?
Janny


Sunday, February 26, 2017

Sneaky Ways to Get More Prayer into Lent…and into Your Life

We’re told in Scripture to “pray without ceasing,” but when you actually think about trying to DO that, it can seem…well…a little tricky. Especially if you close your eyes when you pray, you DON’T want to do it when you’re driving. Right?  :-)

Fortunately, there are lots of little ways to “sneak prayer in” painlessly, even into a very busy life. For those of us entering Lent this week, this would be terrific to start on Wednesday (or even before) and find yourself firmly committed to six weeks later. Talk about a great new habit to form!

Here are a few I’ve discovered over the past several months…

Rosary:
1. In the time it takes me to blow-dry my hair in the morning, I can say ONE complete decade of the Rosary. Yep. Ten Hail Marys, just like that. (If you use extra conditioner or style your hair, you’ll have time for the Glory Be AND the Fatima Prayer, too.) And if you go to the gym like I do and end up with your hair wet MORE than once a day…guess what?

2. Driving somewhere? If your trip will take more than 15-20 minutes, you can pray a whole 5-decade Rosary behind the wheel. Turn off the radio and jump right in the moment you start the engine, and before you get to your destination, you’ll have accomplished a heck of a lot. You can use either use a finger rosary to keep count of the prayers or--wonder of wonders!--use your HANDS to count off the Hail Marys. (You knew there had to be a good reason our hands have ten digits.)

Other prayers:
1. Have one minute? Say these:
“Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.”
“Jesus, Mary, Joseph, I love you; save souls.”
“We adore You, O Christ, and we bless You--because by Your Holy Cross, You have redeemed the world.”
And, of course, the Sign of the Cross is good anytime, anywhere.

2. Have five minutes? Say the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. It goes by fast, but it’s powerful stuff.

3. Grace before meals should be a habit already, but if it’s not, you can start. Grace AFTER your meal? Extra points!

4. First thing in the morning: “Lord, make me a blessing to someone today.” (Word of warning: when you pray this, be prepared for what may happen!)

5. The Angelus is designed for 6 AM, 12 noon, and 6 PM, but if you can’t say it all three times, lunchtime’s an ideal time—whenever your “lunch break” falls. (Mary won’t mind.)

6. One of my favorite prayers is St. Teresa of Calcutta’s “quick novena”: the Memorare, said nine times in a row. Mother used to have her nuns pray one set for whatever their need was, and immediately follow it with a second set in thanksgiving. Try it and see what happens!

7. Another one I love was a favorite of both Venerable Solanus Casey and St. Pio: “Deo Gratias” (“Thanks be to God.”). Fr. Solanus used to tell all he spoke with, “Thank God ahead of time.” You might find yourself uttering this after you see the results of asking to be a blessing!  

And these are just a start. I’m sure, once you begin, you’ll think of lots more. Specifically in Lent, many people try to get to daily Mass, and many more attend Stations of the Cross. Both of those are excellent, and if your work schedule allows them, go for it. But for all the rest of us who can’t always make those structured worship opportunities—grab a minute, say a prayer, and you’re still blessed.


Have a great Lent!

Janny