From "Writers, be wary of Throat-Clearers and Wan Intensifiers. Very, very wary" by Benjamin Dreyer (WaPo).
Here's Dreyer's book: "Dreyer's English: An Utterly Correct Guide to Clarity and Style."
And here's that song (which is about not being able to come up with words to express how marvelous this person is):
As for the missing comma in "Love Actually," I think there's some widely held belief that commas in titles are too fussy and you should strike them without worrying about the rules of punctuation. But "Sex, Lies, and Videotape" even has an Oxford comma.
Posts
49 comments:
"Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words." The mantra of E.B.White in his "Elements of Style". I read and re-reread my copy of Strunk and White's little book before every big writing project. There are a lot of writers and editors that need to read their little book.
Between complexity and simplicity. Between content and constructs. Between objective and handmade tales.
Commalessness...my eyes centered on "male," saw the "lessness" ending as a comment on how it's a romcom chick flick where even the guys aren't really guys, and was lost at what to do with "com."
In the end, I had to look it up and was disappointed that it's just about the comma.
Steve Schainost said..."Omit needless words. Omit needless words. Omit needless words."...There are a lot of writers and editors that need to read their little book.
I've sometimes thought the word processor is the worst thing to happen to long-form writing in the last century. Revisions are too easy. Back when writing a new draft meant retyping every single page, there was a practical premium on brevity. Now every book is 200 pages too long.
Too too or too “too”?
Writing should be neither too brief, nor too long, but beautiful. I don't have a problem with a bit of verbosity; what I can't stand is the careless use of it. Writing should be as concise as possible, while still leaving room for beauty in the language. Sometimes that means a bit of wordiness in order for a sentence to flow better, and to fit with the rhythm of the rest of the writing.
Great post. Oxford commas and commalessness.
I love Elmore Leonards "10 Rules of Writing". It's funny and pretty much spot on. I don't apply them all, but when it comes to adverb use, his list comes front and center in my mind.
From his rules: "Never use an adverb to modify the verb “said” …
…he admonished gravely. To use an adverb this way (or almost any way) is a mortal sin. The writer is now exposing himself in earnest, using a word that distracts and can interrupt the rhythm of the exchange. I have a character in one of my books tell how she used to write historical romances “full of rape and adverbs.”"
I also love his most important rule: "If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it."
Elmore Leonard's style is not a style for every writer, but it's a good list that has stayed in my head. FWIW.
Of course there is William Safire's famous list of writing tips:
Do not put statements in the negative form.
And don't start sentences with a conjunction.
If you reread your work, you will find on rereading that a great deal of repetition can be avoided by rereading and editing.
Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.
Unqualified superlatives are the worst of all.
De-accession euphemisms.
If any word is improper at the end of a sentence, a linking verb is.
Avoid trendy locutions that sound flaky.
Last, but not least, avoid cliches like the plague.
And more like that. Of course good writers know that it's ok to break these rules.
I would never date anyone who eschews the Oxford comma. As I am happily married, that is moot.
The problem is, if I can be so presumptuous, when speaking or writing about the “unfathomable”, or as I prefer the Spanish translation - “insondable”, sounds much better; there are not enough words.
The Oxford comma is not optional! When we consider it optional and it's omitted, it can lead to ambiguity. If it were mandatory, all ambiguity would be removed.
From a quick meme search: "We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin" is clearly different from, "We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin." (Cute graphic, too.)
The problem with letting people use it only when its omission might lead to ambiguity is that too many people don't recognize when that situation pertains. It can be very, very frustrating, actually.
I like to use all the words there are... Honing my prose ought to be my annual Lenten discipline.
The Oxford comma is redundant.
What James K said.
Frank is Frank, but the original is rapturous, glamorous, OK make it amorous.
A non-hyperlink worth copying to go to for its 7:02!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-2l03RM3ug
Sex Lies and Videotape
Sex, Lies and Videotape
Sex, Lies, and Videotape
The third title is superior to the first two and Oxford has nothing to do with it.
“Graham Dalton: I just think - right now I have one key and everything I own is in the car, and I just... I like that, you know? I mean, I just, if I get an apartment, that’s two keys, if I get a job, you know, I might have to open or close, that's more keys, you know, buy some stuff, I'm afraid it's gonna get ripped off, or something, and I get more keys, and I just, I, you know, I just like having the one key, it's clean.”
The Oxford comma is redundant.
It is not - not in every case. And people in general aren't good at grammar and usage and many will not recognize when it is needed for clarity, so the rule ought to be that it is used in all cases. This is my hill to die on!
It does bug me when people add extra commas through misunderstanding the Oxford comma - "Sex, Lies, and, Videotape" - but that kind of error just illustrates my point that people in general are bad at grammar and usage.
I'm doing Spanish on Duolingo and recently had my English translation, "Whom did you see?" (or something like that) rejected in favor of "Who did you see?" Ugh. And don't even get me started on places where the translation ought to be "to whom," "for whom," or "with whom." Duolingo doesn't seem to recognize "whom" at all.
And those people are at least nominally linguists.
Commas are more mandatory in other languages. I tend to put them in when I start new clauses and then take them out when I realize they aren't necessary. There is some rule in English, but I doubt people pay much attention to it nowadays.
Nancy said...I would never date anyone who eschews the Oxford comma. As I am happily married, that is moot.
Wise, very wise. I was trained in Chicago style, which uses the Oxford comma. My wife in AP style, which does not. There's always some tension when we edit each other's work.
“The Oxford comma is not optional! When we consider it optional and it's omitted, it can lead to ambiguity. If it were mandatory, all ambiguity would be removed.”
Not always. How many people went to Oregon in these two sentences (adapted from Wikipedia):
He went to Oregon with Betty, a maid and a cook.
He went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook.
The answer could be four for both, or two for the first and three for the second.
Um, Duolingo update: apparently my (rather acerbic) "My answer should have been accepted" comment, presumably with those of innumerable other grammar police, got their attention and now they're recognizing the correctness of "whom" all over the place.
Amazon describes Benjamin Dreyer as “one of Twitter’s leading language gurus” - now that is funny, an excellent example of damning with faint praise, and it could well be Dreyer’s chosen description of himself, or his publisher’s.
"Good writing, I think, ultimately exists between the twin goal posts"
What is the goal post image doing here? To link good writing to goal-scoring? But goals don't "exist" between goal posts and in many games what does "exist" between goal posts is a goalie. Anyway, not sure it helps.
And might "twin" be a needless word? And "I think"? And "ultimately" too? And doesn't "ultimately" work like "actually"? Anyway, some Althousian editing in order here.
In law, the Oxford comma can be crucial. E.g., "one of A, B, C and D" can mean "A, B, or (C+D)" or "A, B, C or D," and thus lacks clarity.
The Oxford comma is redundant said Joe Biden, a serial fabulist and a pederast.
The above sentence akes a good argument that a comma there would be incorrect.
I'd hate to spend money on a book to be given the expert tip to not use the word "very" in my writing.
"Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do."
You mean like "garner" for "get"?
Magazines, unlike books, usually want a specific word count. When I wrote my "Machinery Matters" column for "Food & Drug Packaging" I had to fill a complete page, no more, no less. At first it was 450 words but new owners changed some things and it had to be 500 words.
Now, online, I still write to a target but it is more flexible. Typically 500 words but +/-50 or so. I always try to hit the target exactly as I think having to think about word count improves my clarity.
I used to write a series of white papers for a client website on how different kinds of packaging machines work. Typically I wrote 1500 words (example here on can sealing https://www.fraingroup.com/white-paper/double-seamed-cans/)
In may I started a similar series in a magazine where I do it in 250 words (can sealing https://www.packagingdigest.com/automation/how-food-cans-are-sealed)
The distillation process can be challenging but fun.
Writing long is easy for me. Concise takes time. Right now I have a 900 word article on virtual/augmented reality written. I need to submit a 500 word article. Today.
John stop fascism vote republican Henry
"He went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook."
This is only ambiguous to those who overuse commas.
I'm a fan of the Oxford comma. And as good as Strunk and White are, I try and consistently fail) to follow Mark Twain's rules:
An author should
1. _Say_ what he is proposing to say, not merely come near it.
2. Use the right word, not its second cousin.
3. Eschew surplusage.
4. Not omit necessary details.
5. Avoid slovenliness of form.
6. Use good grammar.
7. Employ a simple, straightforward style
Writing comments for a Google post has increased my already lively sense of fatalism. Why try to craft a concise or elegant statement when Google will swallow it whole and the words will be lost for posterity? No rhymed couplets for you Google. No research into the need or desirability of an Oxford comma. It all comes to nothing in the end when Google evaporates your words.....I just got a "Whoops. That's an error" notification from Google. I will post against. This will be either a duplicate post or it will disappear altogether. Wordiness or nothingness. My struggle with futility continues.
Does the koala bear
"eat, shoots, and leaves"
"Eats shoots and leaves "
?
There is a great book on commas and grammar by Lynn Truss available at the portal.
I always worry that I use too many commas but can't break the habit
"I love Elmore Leonards "10 Rules of Writing"...."
Blogged on the occasion of his death, here..
Actually -- ahem -- I hate Rules for Writers. These are only useful for university students who want a good grade. Hemingway wasn't sparse because of regulations; that was his tone, his style. Find your voice and write. Those who can write, write. Those who can't, instruct.
writing - definition
NOUN
1 the activity or skill of marking coherent words on paper and composing text: "parents want schools to concentrate on reading, writing, and arithmetic"
2 the activity or occupation of composing text for publication: "she made a decent living from writing"
The overall idea being the conveyance of meaning through visual symbols.
There is a section of the literate (presumed) population who conflate the concept that the way THEY write is the manner in which all OTHERS should write as well - an obvious display of pomposity.
This displays itself as to topic, sentence structure, varnacular and even word usage. In order of instances discrediting this form of censorship - writing about the everyday life of the antebellum US, the horror displayed at the use of dangling participles, any slang as it's evolving, and the "disfavor" of certain words.
These movements will hopefully fail to garner majority support.
writing - definition
NOUN
1 the activity or skill of marking coherent words on paper and composing text: "parents want schools to concentrate on reading, writing, and arithmetic"
2 the activity or occupation of composing text for publication: "she made a decent living from writing"
The overall idea being the conveyance of meaning through visual symbols.
There is a section of the literate (presumed) population who conflate the concept that the way THEY write is the manner in which all OTHERS should write as well - an obvious display of pomposity.
This displays itself as to topic, sentence structure, varnacular and even word usage. In order of instances discrediting this form of censorship - writing about the everyday life of the antebellum US, the horror displayed at the use of dangling participles, any slang as it's evolving, and the "disfavor" of certain words.
These movements will hopefully fail to garner majority support.
writing - definition
NOUN
1 the activity or skill of marking coherent words on paper and composing text: "parents want schools to concentrate on reading, writing, and arithmetic"
2 the activity or occupation of composing text for publication: "she made a decent living from writing"
The overall idea being the conveyance of meaning through visual symbols.
There is a section of the literate (presumed) population who conflate the concept that the way THEY write is the manner in which all OTHERS should write as well - an obvious display of pomposity.
This displays itself as to topic, sentence structure, varnacular and even word usage. In order of instances discrediting this form of censorship - writing about the everyday life of the antebellum US, the horror displayed at the use of dangling participles, any slang as it's evolving, and the "disfavor" of certain words.
These movements will hopefully fail to garner majority support.
(If this is a dup, it's because Blogger gave a Whoops on post.)
Comma, comma, comma comedian...
Twin is redundant. Should be between the goal posts.
Exists is a weak verb.
If a reader can summarize your point in fewer words, why not do the work yourself?
"Actually" as in "Well Actually, so and so is incorrect" is a good internet marker. When you see it, you know you're dealing with a Gamma know-it-all, and the whole comment can be skipped. Its up there with "As an athiest" or "As a life-long Republican"
Actually, the Oxford comma was not invented at Oxford.
Johnny Mercer is supreme. Very supreme.
Frank looks mahvelas.
Not always. How many people went to Oregon in these two sentences (adapted from Wikipedia):
He went to Oregon with Betty, a maid and a cook.
My favorite example:
The people I admire most are my parents, Mother Teresa and the Pope.
I find Leonard's "rules" useful for new writers to follow until they develop their voice. Which means figuring out why they should violate them.
For example, Tolkien would object to "omit the parts readers skip over" because many readers, even fans, skip over the Tom Bombadil chapter. I did when I was younger. But when I reread the trilogy recently, after a lifetime of experience, I read every word of it, and was enthralled.
Tolkien populated his world with creatures who were of the world (humans and hobbits), ethereal creatures who were a part of the world (elves), and those who were beyond the concerns of the world (the eagles). Then there's Tom Bombadil, who was totally unconcerned with the evil in Mordor.
That was the world, and I wouldn't want JRRT to delete a word of it because most fans thinks it's too wordy.
"Good writing, I think, ultimately exists between the twin goal posts of as-few-words-as-you-need and as-many-words-as-you-want."
Wow. Right up there with things are always found in the last place you look. I hope he was just trying to be droll.
The modern preoccupation with speed, efficiency, functionalism, concision, minimalism and so forth is a fashion; as all fashions do, it will pass, to be replaced with some other preoccupation.
Dreyer's book is clever and witty but made no impression on my own writing. I know he's on Twitter but the hours in the day for that site are too short to read every intelligent person's chattering; the only language writer I read often is... sigh; I cannot recall her name but she is @grammartable. She travels the country, setting up her table in the center of different towns, and takes questions about grammar and usage etc from passers-by. Ellen something or other.
Post a Comment