My morning routine includes checking my e-mail and social media accounts, perusing through special daily offers and (these days) checking for vacant apartment listings.
Because I just added the Grammar Girl widget to my left sidebar. Whup whup. I'm a big fan of Grammar Girl and regularly either read her posts or listen to her podcasts. I also own her book, "Quick and Dirty Tips for Better Writing." It is also very likely that I will soon own her second book, "The Grammar Devotional," sometime in the near future.
*Did I mention that I'm purchasing books, movies, and music all the time now for FREE? Yes, you should all check out Swagbucks. (AND JOIN THROUGH MY LINK SO I GET A REFERRAL.) Honestly, even if I didn't get referrals, I would still recommend this site. (Check out my post and explanation of the site when I started.) I personally choose to spend my swagbucks on Amazon gift cards that I spend on the items I listed above. Yay.
Back to grammar.
Oh, AND, if I ever get a chance to teach a high school journalism class, I would definitely use this reference in the classroom.
Soo...if any of you are as excited as I am—and you should be—just scroll down a tiny bit and THERE IT WILL BE. Right there in my left sidebar. It has taken the place of the outdated Summer Songs 2009 music playlist that has not actually shown up since Imeem shut down. (That was a very sad day. Plus now Lala is dying, which means I am dying too. Come on music industry!)
What will it do? Why, I am so glad you asked.
The widget will display the titles and play the audio clips for the ten most recent episodes of the Grammar Girl podcast show. Users clicking the “Listen” button in the widget as it appears on my site will be able to listen to the complete podcast episode without leaving my blog.
That's right—you don't even have to leave my blog. You can stay all day long. You can read all of my years and years of entries. What? I'm the only one that occassionally does that? I guess I can accept that.
Yes, I am very busy right now. I am only distracting myself from the craziness that is life by posting about perhaps the most insignificant thing I did today. Perhaps you'll get to know about the significant things in...meh, two weeks? Maybe three. OK, maybe four, just to be safe. :)
When it comes to modern language usage, especially concerning any technology-related terms, I get slightly frustrated with those who make claims like "'Text' is not a verb," implying a speaker cannot say "I'll text you the information." Instead a speaker would have to say, for example, "I'll send you a text message with the information." (Don't even consider using any forbidden slang terms like "info.") In the second example, the verb is now "send," while the noun "text message" is acting as a direct object. (Get crazy and shorten that to "text.") "You" is then the indirect object, and "with the information" is a prepositional phrase. ...Oh dear, I've let my 7th grade sentence dissection exercises lead me off track. *Focusing*
I admit. I am a decriptivist as far as grammarians go—if you can bring yourself to even slightly consider me a grammarian. And I just realized I have a much easier time identifying myself based on my views of grammar and English usage than I do on my views of political issues. In the world of grammarians, with many stereotypically described with a better-than-thou motivation to find every—any—mistake, I often feel as though I am the minority fighting for my voice to be heard, struggling for my beliefs to be understood, accepted, maybe respected. But the bombardment of those screaming "Y-O-U-apostrophe-R-E means 'you are.' Y-O-U-R means 'your" (Oh wait, that was Ross in "Friends") tends to overshadow my stubborn statements of "Yes, 'texted' can be used as a past tense verb of 'text'" or my response "I'm good." to questions of how I'm doing.
No, I'm not saying you don't need to use an apostrophe and the extra "e" in "you're" or to not bother distinguishing between "there," "their," and "they're." While I'm not sure how to exactly determine what will eternally be right and wrong in overall usage of a language, there are accepted styles of language for various settings that you simply have to conform to. (Well I suppose you don't HAVE to.) But to be taken seriously academically and in job interviews, there is one form of "correct" language and to be taken seriously in another setting, there is different form. I for one embrace the fact that I can speak differently than I write in a professional setting. That my academic writing differs from my writing on my blog. That I can speak one way with my friends and another with subject experts. That every day I can make up words and opt to include usage I wouldn't dream of in another setting.
I have control of my language.
Do you remember your teachers telling you to never start a sentence with "and"? Or the dramatics of the apostasy that follows if you split an infinitive? No doubt these teachers also emphasized that a preposition should never end a sentence. These "hard-and-fast rules" reflect years of trying to control a language and fit it in a mold. (I love that I listed these three examples and then found all three mentioned in an article entitled "Three Grammar Rules You Can (And Should) Break.")
There may be some individuals somewhere who still insist on these rules. Maybe. Perhaps some nitpicky teachers are still teaching them. Perhaps. But really what is the point? Sooner or later, students and language users realize that the contorted, un-split sentence is awkward and, hey, look around, people are splitting the heck out of infinitives left and right. Nevermind that not ending a sentence with a preposition is a rule that really has nothing to do with the preposition but instead wants to get rid of unnecessary words. ("I have no idea where this rule came from" is fine. "Where are you at?" might be better as "Where are you?")
Forrester: Paragraph three starts...with a conjunction, "and." You should never start a sentence with a conjunction.
Jamal: Sure you can.
Forrester: No, it's a firm rule.
Jamal: No, it was a firm rule. Sometimes using a conjunction at the start of a sentence makes it stand out. And that may be what the writer's trying to do.
Forrester:And what is the risk?
Jamal: Well the risk is doing it too much. It's a distraction. And it could give your piece a run-on feeling. But for the most part, the rule on using "and" or "but" at the start of a sentence is pretty shaky. Even though it's still taught by too many professors. Some of the best writers have ignored that rule for years, including you.
Maybe this is all a result of the English language completely and definitely going down the drain. The teenagers are ruining it! Text messaging and e-mail will be the end of all that was good and all that we cherished!
...
Calm down people. Yes, here is where my passion for descriptive grammar steps in. I think I pretty regularly make conscious decisions about what I say and how I use the English language. That's right, once again, I do my research, choose my side and proceed to respond "I'm good" to the question "How are you?"
How many times have you heard "Ain't ain't a word, and you ain't supposed to say it." But is it not widely used informally? I don't personally use "ain't" on a regular basis, but I love belting "Ain't it a shame that every time you hear my name you can't think straight" with Kellie Pickler like any country music-loving gal. No, technically "ain't" may not be a word in standard usage, but it's everywhere and can't be denied. It might drive some people crazy, but who can say that "ain't" can't be a "proper" word? Why were "haven't," "who's," "doesn't" and "you're" chosen, but "ain't" left behind?
P.S. This is not me advocating for a wider use of "ain't." I'm just saying.
I just discovered yet another book to add to my To-Read list: "The Lexicographer's Dilemma The Evolution of English from Shakespeare to South Park. " The author, Jack Lynch, is a professor of English at Rutgers University and was the editor of Samuel Johnson's Dictionary. From what I've read thus far, he describes how we got "proper English" and that grammar isn't made up of rules or laws like the law of gravity or those against thefts. Instead they are fallible by people and subject to change.
"Most of these [rules of English] probably describe the speech habits of of some class of people, once upon a time. It will tend to be the upper class of people a generation or two ago. And that's what many people decided proper English is," says Jack Lynch.
Stated simply, I advocate for grammar usage based on the needs and desires of the people who use the language. I embrace language change and get excited when those changes evolve, are identified, and then accepted. Disregarding various opinions and arguments of whether those changes are for the better or worse, I appreciate the notion of a group of people taking control of their own lives—in this case language. Language as a whole should embrace change, especially those reflective of a current culture and lifestyle.
Several weeks ago I was at an apartment in my ward playing games on a Sunday night. Catch Phrase was rolling and one girl mentioned something that you put two of at the end of a sentence. The team guessed "space," which was the correct answer, but I couldn't help but mutter "Except you don't" under my breath that only those closest to me could hear. Then the kid next to me gives me an approving look and says, "I know."
And then we move on. :)
It's not too big of a deal, but I've found that while many people ARE aware, there are still lots that have no idea that you aren't supposed to put two spaces after the end of a sentence. I've found it funny because one of the first things I ALWAYS have to do when I edit new material is run a Find and Search replace all double spaces with just one space. Every style guide and dozens of grammar books say to just use one space. OK, I can accept that, but why? I've always thought that the two spaces was something our middle school teachers would teach us just to MAKE SURE we got it right. But that doesn't really make sense. Which is why I LOVED this podcast by Grammar Girl—both the question and the response.
Grammar Girl—Spacing Out
Turns out, the whole thing relates back to typewriters. Simply put, each letter used to take up the same space, no matter its size. So the "i" and the "m," had the same space, but obviously the "i" would be surrounded by a little extra. To adapt to that, any typist had to put TWO spaces after a sentence to make sure you can recognize the space. Today, typing is done proportionally, and there is no need for the extra space.
Wow, ya gotta love it right. :P
Here are some of the other basic, oh very basic, but common errors I see a lot.
feel vs. believe
Feel refers to something you can touch, a sense Believe is a thought or idea
Wrong: "They feel that the position was not assigned properly." Right: "They believe Jim should have received the promotion."
try and vs. try to
For some reason this phrase has become ever so common. You can use "try and" to indicate two separate things, but if it's one...well, use try to.
Right: "I'm going to try and hope it will all work out." (Two separate things. I'll try and hope. I'll not just try hoping. .. I hope I made the difference clear. :P)
Wrong: "I'm going to try and make it to the gym for my Zumba class." Right: "I'm going to try to make it to the gym."
over vs. more than
There's more than one opinion on this, but check Grammar Girl's post. I go with the tradition use that "over" actually means OVER, a sort of direction, not more than.
Right: "I stepped over the puddle." "There were more than 100 people attending."
Games and quizzes are fun...right? I've been doing several through my internship with Careerealism.com for the past few weeks. One such quiz, titled the "Career Interests Game," talks about how different people's personalities may find different environments more to their liking. The game was developed by a Dr. John Holland who has created 6 different groups: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Go ahead and visit the page to see how it works, but the purpose is to find your "Holland Code"—a three-letter code that describes the top three, in order, that you are attracted to.
Mine is AES: Artistic, Enterprising, Social.
I was asked to take this quiz as part of the career mentoring program the Careerealism interns (plus private clients) get to participate in. Our next step was to read through the list of jobs under our three selected categories, find those with our Holland Code (with a little flexibility), and select any and all that interest us—regardless of perceived requirements, training, possibility, etc. We then use these selected position in further steps in the program that maybe, just maybe I'll explain later.
But I found my list to be, well, a little familiar.
English Teacher (ASE)
Journalist (ASE) (EAS)
Photographer (AES)
Writer, Editor (ASI)
Advertising, Marketing, PR (EAS)
High School Teacher (SAE)
Graphic Designer (AES)
At first I was like "All right! I'm definitely in the right field!" I'm currently a journalist/editor/designer. I have marketing and PR experience. The one additional trained talent I wish I could have is photography. And I've known I would looove to teach high school journalism later on.
But then I wondered if I was just being biased in the choices I selected. Sometimes it's kinda frustrating to think that maybe you just trick yourself into THINKING something is what you want to do, just because that's what you are doing and perhaps what you think you are good at. I'm not saying that's my case—after all, weren't my last two posts a personal essay about everything I love about editing?
For me, I think sometimes I get caught up on looking out, rather than looking in. I think I'm not smart enough, not dedicated enough, not qualified enough. I see all the many other people out there and think, they are a much better editor than I am; they are way better with words than I am; they know so much more about designing then I do—and conclude maybe this isn't what I'm supposed to be doing after all.
Then again, can it really be a coincidence that everything related to what I currently do professionally (and really do enjoy) was so closely related to my initial result?
I want to know what you are, so play the game and leave me a comment with your result and what you think!
When I think about how my personal characteristics match those of an editor, several things pop out at me. For example, my college roommates thought I was crazy for my almost obsessive interest in the course registration process. I admit it's weird, but I really enjoyed selecting different classes and arranging each time offered within a schedule. I always know the registration options become available and have been known to configure schedules for friends. I think this quirk shows I have a knack for details and don't become overwhelmed in very specific, detail-oriented processes. Combing through details is one task I enjoy and is what attracts me to the copyediting aspect of editing. Additionally, my writing background demonstrates my love for words and ability to communicate effectively through them. "The Copyeditor's Guide to Substance and Style,"offers other characteristics editors have when it states,
"Most editors share common traits—a love of the written word, an appreciation of language in all its richness, a desire to see order emerge from chaos in the form of a manuscript that sings or speaks from the heart," (page 2).
My detail-oriented characteristic also relates to the production process, although the situation is a little different. In copyediting, you take a completed text and break it apart into paragraphs, sentences, and words; whereas at the beginning of the production process, you start with nothing and combine the headlines, articles, and photographs to create the publication. While the processes are different, I really enjoy both. In "The Layers of Magazine Editing," Michael Evans describes an editor's job at the beginning of a publication process, and he highlights an aspect I really enjoy. He says,
"Every issue of every magazine begins as Emptiness and Nothing, and it is the job for the editor to replace that blankness with scintillating articles, compelling photos, and catchy ideas that will keep the readers coming back again and again," (page 109).
I think it is really exciting to sit down with whomever I am working with and brainstorm possibilities for the next publication. So many factors affect not only the stories that get printed but also every characteristic of each story, such as the angle or intended audience. Again, this relates back to giving attention to every detail and being able to sort through what I have and figure out exactly what I need. Although the process sometimes requires a lot of work, it really is rewarding to see everything come together, piece by piece, until there is a final project—a publication you are proud to have been a part of.
I love the bustling excitement that always seem to exist in big cities, and when I think about my dream of being a magazine editor and writer, I always picture myself surrounded by the dynamics of such a city blossoming with adventure.
Although I don't remember a specific reason why I chose to enter the fields of journalism and editing, I have since noticed many popular depictions in movies and books about the life of an editor—especially female editors. These depictions may be what have influenced what I see for my future, as the editors featured always seem to be successful, smart, and laid-back, and, well to me at least, their job seems quite perfect.
While these cinema depictions are lacking in that they often conveniently omit the details about the nitty-gritty assignments every editor deals with, I have found that they do highlight the limitless aspect of the job description of an editor/writer—these professionals may encounter ANY type of assignment. This characteristic attracts me to editing by allowing me to become informed on a variety of subjects, opening doors to many different kinds of positions, strengthening my personal characteristics, and helping me work with others towards a common goal.
One passage in "Editors on Editing: What Writers Need to Know About What Editors Do," by Gerald Gross explains that being an editor is not merely hunting through a manuscript for errors or typos, but instead includes proposing ideas and subjects, soliciting authors and experts, deal making, line editing, packaging, preparing profit and loss projections, and countless other tasks," (page 35).
I've found this statement is true—an editor is responsible for many different things and has to have knowledge about many different topics. In fact, I've realized the aspect of journalism and editing I love the most is the aspect that allows me to get involved in different subjects and to expand my knowledge in different ways.
I love the process of researching a new subject for an article I'm writing or analyzing and asking questions about a manuscript. I love the idea of continuously growing and learning while performing a task. I fully agree with the statement that "editing can, and should be, not only a life-enhancing profession but also a liberal education in itself, for it gives you the privilege of working with the most creative people of your time," (Gross, page 28).
In addition to learning about a wide variety of subjects, I also love that being an editor does not limit me to one specific job. The idea of working as a magazine editor does thrill me, but it is not necessarily what I'll want to do for the rest of my life. I believe as an editor I have so many options as to what I can do professionally. If I don't want to be a head editor over a lot of production processes, I can simply copyedit. If I'm not in a position to have a full-time job, I can freelance. If I don't live at a permanent address, I can maintain business and clients through electronic edits. The options are endless, and I look forward to continue exploring what I believe editing personally offers me.
As a ninth grader at South Hills Middle School, I, like all of my classmates, had to prepare a project for the annual science fair. Now I had participated in my share of science fairs and usually did pretty well. This year was no exception. After all, with my impressive display board, extensive researching and surveying and—no joke—food samples, how could I go wrong? I even made it up a couple rounds and got to bring my project to display at some sort of regional fair at BYU. (Today, I have no idea where on campus this science fair took place but I’m suspecting it was in one of those buildings that, well, actually focus on the sciences.…I didn’t spend much time in those.)
I don’t recall this experience for any sort of pompous motive. (Although a somewhat recent run-in with a classmate still recalled that I beat him out for first place at the science fair.) As impressive as that accomplishment is, the success in this science fair is not what I most frequently remember. Instead, my memories focus on the grammar.
Yep, although it was a science fair and I had quite a time experimenting about the connection between sight and taste, I have planted this experience in mind as the point where I first became concerned with the differences of “affect” and “effect.”
You see, while working on my display board during my first period science class, my teacher informed me that I had selected the wrong word for my title: "Does Sight Affect Taste?" I probably didn't know better, said OK and later printed out the other word to use. In class the next day, my teacher changed her mind and said she thought I had it right the first time. And she changed her mind at least a couple times more. (Today there is no question in my mind which is correct, but I have no idea which I started with or which I ended up using...I'm hoping it was the correct one. Looking back, maybe that's why I didn't advance after the regional round...)
In 9th grade, I had no experience with the fascinating grammar books I now routinely read. I knew "affect" and "effect" were commonly confused, but no one was really offering me any help to figure it out.
For the record: affect: verb, indicating a relationship between two parts; to act upon or influence effect: noun, a change; an outcome; something brought about by a cause
I think I've been pretty open about my grammar style and my take on those commonly termed "grammar snobs." As an editor, I constantly face the stereotype of a gloating editor dedicated to finding errors everywhere around her.
"Another editor. That thing behind his ear is his pencil. Whenever he finds a bright thing in your manuscript he strikes it out with that. That does him good and makes him smile and show his teeth, the way he is doing in the picture. This one has just been striking out a smart thing, and now he is sitting there with his thumbs in his vest-holes, gloating. They are full of envy and malice, editors are." Picture and quote from "How to Make History Dates Stick," by Mark Twain
Any who know me or chat with me online could quickly see that I’m not quite that…intense.
I don’t question why not every one knows random things like capitalizing page with one number, but not multiple (Page 2, pages 3-7). And I'm OK that some people don't quite understand capitalization...that school subjects are not capitalized. (English, Spanish, French, etc. are languages.) I know commas can be confusing. (Even though we’ve all been dealing with them for who knows how long.) And I’ve participated in discussion after discussion in educational circles about the spiraling downward emphasis on grammar in schools.
All in all, I do think knowing and understanding grammar is important. But, honestly, I’m not sure if some teachers should be teaching kids anything about grammar. In fact, I think most of the confusion that high school and college students face concerning grammar can all stem back to incorrect and inconsistent methods taught by teachers who were confused themselves about the material.
How many of us can remember learning to do something one way only to have it corrected later? (I remember being taught in 1st grade to always capitalize the word “island.”)
It's kinda funny because I've been getting my resume and portfolio stuff updated so I can start applying for various jobs and, in doing so, have obviously been browsing through the 2008 BYU Communications alumni magazine that I designed my last semester of school.
...which is a lot of fun for me, because I loved that project and was reminded how much I like that kind of design.
And for a brief amount of time there was actually some talk of me designing this next year's issue as well. But, obviously, that fell through and today I learned what happened...and think it turned out great for the department. Via the BYU Communications blog (for any of you fellow former or current students), I was excitedly updated about the recent release of the 2009 issue, now named the "Comms Alumni and Friends" magazine. Turns out the whole magazine was handed over to the Bradley Public Relations Agency where it had an editor-in-chief, someone over layout & design, someone over cover design, senior editors, copy editors and contributing writers.
I think that's AWESOME because a year ago, it was being handled by just me and Emily Bennion, who took the role of editor and writer. And it has come even further from the previous issues from years before.
So my quick review of the publication via pdf (I will have to get myself a copy of the actual copy):
I think the cover is great! This one page that holds so much importance was the page that personally gave me the most trouble. I started out wanting to create a typical magazine cover with a prominent image and text blurbs featuring the inner content. But we kept running into road blocks because we only had a couple high quality photos that would work, but that were later deemed "not OK" to go on the cover (just a few BYU-related issues :P). Then we wanted the cover to feature the magazine's main feature article, but again, photos were the issue. And now, looking back, I think I just got caught in a creative design block where it was hard to wander completely away from the original idea for the cover. I wasn't satisfied with the final product but with the limited time I was allowed to spend on it (student work limits), the news that we couldn't use the other photos and, of course, the upcoming deadline, we had to get to press. (And sometimes that's how it is in the world of newspapers and magazines.) I also like the overall theme that they've incorporated throughout the entire publication. Although there are some things I'd personally do differently, overall I think they suceeded in coming up with a great finished product...even though I would have loved to have a second shot at it!!!
One of my tasks at work is to respond to e-mails addressing errors in our publications. Most often they are about typos, misspellings and mistakes in the crossword puzzles. Usually people, whether they be students, teachers or parents, are pretty understanding. I go over their concerns, check them via my copies of the publications, note the needed changes, forward the changes to the designer, send information for an errata sheet to be posted on our Web site to the CSRs, and e-mail back to the complaint with appreciation for their input and assurance that the needed changes have been made.
Some of our publications are a little older and actually don’t get edited by me or the other editor. These are ones that have been brought into our company from other sister companies and the standards are, well, kinda lacking. Eventually all of the publications will be top notch but with about 80 of them, we can only focus on a few each year, which is kinda unfortunate. One lady e-mailed me twice this month. She is a bit … well, over the top. My favorite comments from these two complaints:
“If my class handed in work that looked like the puzzle in this issue, I would have them start from scratch at recess.” “Are your people asleep on the job? How can something as grossly wrong as this be missed by an editor when a 10-year-old kid can pick it out right away.”
We are currently addressing the issues. I'd be scared if I were in her class....
So I stumbled onto the lovely homepage of Brigham Young University and one of the featured articles caught my eye. I clicked on the link and was brought to a page full of text that under normal circumstances I probably would not have read. But I started....and kept going to the end. Now most journalists are well aware and somewhat accepting of the fact that readers are not likely to read an article in its entirety. Hence, the journalistic format--the inverted pyramid.
As this diagram shows, the crucial information goes at top (Who, what, why, where, how) because the reader "could stop reading at any time." And journalists write to accommodate that. While this is just one format, it captures the idea that journalists are trying to balance providing the information you need with providing an intriguing, interesting angle that will make you WANT to get all the way through the article.
So I have to say props to the unknown author of "National math champ commits to BYU" (Having been that unknown author several times myself, it's nice to have people appreciate your article even if they don't know its from you.)
I think the author did an excellent job of finding a unique and intriguing story through which a lot of other information could also be tied in. Not only does this article focus on BYU freshmen Sam Dittmer and his unique accomplishments, but it also uses this story opportunity to focus on the new school year with 4,684 new freshmen, BYU's impressive ranking (tied with Harvard) for the rate of admitted students who enroll, its excellent math department, BYU's success record in national math Olympiads, BYU's role as a launching pad for graduate schools, and BYU's top-ranking intramural participation.
Now you might naturally fit some of those topics together, but this story does an excellent job of reaching outside of the box and bringing in topics that you might not ever relate to a high school kid from Illinois. Not to mention, this is a fantastic story for presenting stats about a school. Take the general idea, find an interesting quirk, and use that quirk to present the idea and information in a way that make people care.
I've written my share of stories about school and personal rankings so I know first-hand some of the challenges that come when writing such a story. While working at the Marriott School, I wrote these stories EVERY TIME a new ranking came out. Sometimes we had a half hour to turn around and publish/release the stats....which gave us time to give the normal, boring, informational facts that BYU went up two rankings from last year, is among schools such as X, Y, and Z, and was recognized for its exceptional faculty...and blah, blah, blah. Sometimes, I would even just update a story from the previous year, changing the dating information and, of course, the ranking (which hopefully went up). But no one really cares about all that. They care about people, situations, experiences.
Anyways, I was impressed with this article and all that the author accomplished with it. I think it is an excellent example of a great way to present information and to connect with the reader in a way that keeps them reading...in the end, they've read the whole thing and know all about the success BYU is experience in a variety of fields. This is something I would use to show journalism students how to present a story....and maybe I will someday. (For those of you who don't know, I would LOVE to teach a high school journalism class one day!)
At my work we are constantly editing any of our many publications. With more than 70 publications going out to all 50 states, there is a lot of content and a lot of repetition in the mass content. Each regular edition of a publication also has a teacher edition as well as a teacher supplement. Anyways, on top of everything else, all of these materials have been coming together from 5 different companies until this last February when my company, American Legacy Publishing, acquired the publications for all 50 states.
The reason I mention all this is to present the many opportunities for various things with the same content to be edited differently. However, I find some of my greatest editing satisfaction when I encounter this. You see, I’ll come upon a phrase or punctuation use that isn’t necessarily wrong but just not as clean or as correct as it could be, depending on the situation. Sometimes I hesitantly make the change, asking myself if it is really that big of a deal and also wondering how other people might edit it differently. But then I get to the next document where those errors I found are no longer there…and guess what? The previous editor (someone at sometime…who knows) edited it the same way I did. Yes, that’s a nice feeling. :)
I was checking and verifying a Web address we mention in one of our publications at work. The address was wrong (so good thing I checked) and this is the error I received. It was definitely better than the normal error/page not found message.
You were probably looking for something a lot more interesting than this page. Hey, we all get lost from time to time. Sometimes getting lost is part of the adventure.
Anyway, we couldn't find the document you requested. If you got here by typing a URL, please make sure the spelling, capitalization, and punctuation are correct.
So a random podcast led me to watch this video. Entitled Font Conference, you'll see many of the popular fonts...yes fonts, as in the way your letters and words look on the screen. Watch for your favorites and the personalities associated with them.
Having studied journalism through high school and college, I have been pretty drilled into the AP style rule to omit the oxford comma. (the last comma in a series: apples, bananas, and monkeys) In my editing minor, the style guide of choice was always Chicago, whose rule is to include the oxford comma. Personally, I tend to follow Chicago and use the oxford comma. It really doesn’t matter what you do as long as you are consistent. I know I probably go back and forth since I use both styles so often, so I have to make sure I know what I’m writing for. But I find when I’m doing personal writing, I generally do use that last little comma.
Like I mentioned, it doesn’t really matter what you do. So when I send emails, I’ll somewhat naturally (although it is of course on the back of my mind what rule I’m following) insert the oxford comma. However, things get complicated when I’m sending emails at work. Technically here in our editing and publications we follow AP style and omit the comma. But if I use it in my personal correspondence, will my coworkers think I don’t know my grammar rules? I am pretty relaxed for an editor, but hey, I know what the rules are and know how to use them…Of course, I’m probably mentioning this because I read emails from my coworkers and do notice if they use the oxford or not. So of course I think they’ll notice in mine as well, but do they know I’m a self-proclaimed Chicago-oxford-comma-rule follower? (Thought I’d throw some hyphens in there for fun..I don’t usually.) So every time I write a work email, I pause and contemplate….
My interest in history has once again been sparked as I pore over article after article reporting about the history of each of our states as well as our country. I've actually wanted to go read some of the classic American books about history that I haven't picked up for a while. That is one thing I am going to try to do more of soon…read. Anyways, I've edited quite a few articles covering the history and situations involved in slavery. Today I'm working on writing a little part of an article focused on the women's rights movements in Massachusetts. Doing both of these projects really make me think about how these different groups have had to really fight for their freedom. (Actually, another article also touched on the discrimination again the Mormons that led them to the West.) Sometimes I'm just baffled on how these things took place. Yes, everything was in a different time; there were different lifestyles, cultures, beliefs, etc. But seriously.
I read about Henry "Box" Brown, a slave who stored food and supplies in a box, climbed in himself and mailed himself to freedom in the North. All he had to do was cross a border and suddenly his life could be different...But why did it have to be different? ...To be free in one place, but not free in another. I read about the many slaves who learned how to read and write despite the slave codes that forbid them to do so. Slave owners feared the power slaves would have if they were educated...
I research about Lucy Stone, a woman's rights pioneer born in 1818. She attended Oberlin College as one of the first Massachusetts women to earn a college degree. She graduated with honors and was even invited to write the commencement address…but she refused as she wouldn't be able to read it herself; women did not participate in these public exercises. A dedicated fellow was able to persuaded Lucy to let go of her objections to marriage, but together they protested the laws that wouldn't recognize a wife as an "independent, rational being." Lucy omitted the word obey from the standard vows and kept her own name.
While some from these groups still believe inequalities exist—and to be honest, they probably do—I look to today where things have seemingly progressed so far. I look how far things have changed and, personally, I'm content with where things are for me as part of a group that had to fight and voice. I enjoy giving public addresses (Lucy Stone defied others and, though she wouldn't be able to deliver her own graduation speech as a woman, she became a great orator and delivered speeches across the country.), I enjoy working hard and knowing my success can be rewarded, I enjoy earning leadership positions and having authority, I enjoy getting an education and having any opportunity open to do so, I enjoy my right to analyze political situations and to vote for whom I think will be the best leaders, I enjoy the endless opportunities I see before me in the career, I enjoy making things happen for myself, I enjoy being able to stand on my own, I enjoy being able to OWN things, to have my own possession (not be a possession)
This year we had a very strong woman contender for president and who did she lose out to but a black, educated man. We all know that life can't be entirely fair. But I look back at individuals who were put in situations we today can't even dream about happening. We've come so far but I also wonder where we are going. What prejudices do we still have today? Prejudices that years down the road our prosperity will not be able to grasp an understanding of. Will they wonder how why things possibly were the way they are? Will they being able to at all connect to our beliefs and thoughts? It makes me question how I think issues should be handled. Nothing can be black and white. I'm not going to get into details of who is fighting for what, but I just imagine school kids down the road learning about specific events and trying to fathom a time period where these people couldn't do this, this group had no say in that, she wasn't allowed to do this, he was forced to do that. You can argue whether it's for better or for worse…I just wonder what's going to happen, how we can make a difference, and what those in the future will think about it.
OK so fyi another one of my articles has been posted as the lead story on lds.org. This one is on the True to the Faith resource and is one of my top five articles I wrote during my internship. However, I was looking over the posted article (at this lovely link) and there were a couple things that pretty much SORELY STUCK OUT to me while I read it. These things are really just minor editor changes (Luckily for me my editor said I was a really good writer and rarely had to change much of my work) but sometimes these things are so completely off of my personal writing style that when I'm reading and all of the sudden it's different from how I would personally write it, I really have to stop and focus and be like "what does it say?" Not to mention, several of these articles I read and reread so many times that I almost have them subconsciously memorized. This same type of experience actually happened to me as a writer for the Daily Universe as well. One specific change really altered the way I flowed the article when I wrote it and it still bothers me today.
In my article about the Stadium of Fire in 2006. The second paragraph as printed says:
From sending text messages to servicemen to reuniting one family after an eight-month separation, one main focus of the show was honoring the American troops serving their country from around the world.
My original version:
From sending text messages to servicemen to reuniting one family after an eight-month separation, a main focus of the show was honoring the American troops serving their country from around the world.
Caught the difference? The change is simple and to most it doesn't matter but the change here was from "a main focus of the show" to "one main focus of the show." For me, as a writer, reader, and editor, I like the flow that comes with "a main focus" .... at least when I read it. I don't like the word change to one because, first of all, one is repeated twice in that sentence which kinda stops the flow with what seems to be a repetition. Second, the phrase "one main focus" implies that there are many other main focuses. I know that "a main focus" doesn't completely eliminate this idea, but as the writer I chose a over one...and other seemly insignificant small indicators like the...because this main focus was what I thought was the most important, and while there were other themes that repeated throughout the evening, this one was the strongest and the one that would best represent the evening...White it wasn't the only focus, it was the largest and most important...none of the others were worth mentioning.
Ok that probably means nothing to you and probably makes sense to even fewer. But when I first read the printed version of the article, this SO stuck out to me and I really wish it hadn't been changed...especially when the change really doesn't fix any proposed problem the editor likely noticed.
OK on to my True to the Faith article. I honestly haven't read the whole entire thing through yet, but in what I did, I noticed a couple things that just don't fit my style. It's late and I haven't been getting enough sleep lately so I'll just mention one.
The first paragraph....talk about the main focal point of an article! The published version you will all see:
When Robert Lund, a bishop in Kaysville, Utah, USA, encounters any gospel-related question or concern, one resource he always turns to is True to the Faith.
Now, this one probably really really sticks out to me because of how familiar I was with this first sentence. This is a pretty long article so throughout my writing and rewriting of it, I read this first sentence quite a bit in my mind. I'm sure there was a reason they made this change and blah blah blah. But, well, I hate it.
My original version states: When Robert Lund, a bishop in Kaysville, Utah, USA encounters any gospel-related question or concern, there's one resource he always turns to--True to the Faith.
I think the following graphs are the same. I don't remember if I went directly into a quote or first provided information about what True to the Faith is. Ulk, again, this doesn't seem like too big of a change but I can't stand the reorganization in that first sentence. And maybe that's just me.
There's so much to say about the role of an editor to preserve an author's voice and the times its ok to forget rules to make room for a writers artistical voice.....so much to say...and maybe i will someday. but for now, im going to bed.
RSS Feed (xml)
