Cassie's Perfect ... Word

Let Me Just Say This, In Conclusion

A recent Facebook post by one of my former coworkers inspired this rant.  Dan wrote that he hoped "the 'end of the day' gets here soon so that people will stop saying 'at the end of the day.'"

There are a number of trite, useless expressions like "at the end of the day," and I could go on for hours.  But I won't.  Watch, though, for future posts on other favorites, such as "in the end," "that said," "having said that," and of course, "at the end of the day."

I'll devote this space to one of the meaningless phrases people -- especially students -- use to "tie it all up" when they can't think of anything else to say (or write).  I'm referring, of course, to the closing phrase, "In conclusion," and I admit that using it was one of my favorite bad habits during my college days.

Evidently, that practice is still alive and well in the writing of college essays.  I just found a Web site, MegaEssays.com, where you can purchase "high quality term papers and essays."  (Isn't that called "cheating?")  Anyway, here are some examples of that high-quality prose:

"In conclusion, William Shakespeare evidently possessed a feminist mindset when creating his plays."

"In conclusion Shakespeare shows that evilness can bring down the most heroic and strongest of men, by attacking what is weak within them."

"In conclusion, Shakespeare uses this poem to show us what true love really is."

"In conclusion Shakespeare presented such insightful philosophy and ideas within the play, that the text is still being applied in present time."

I'm pretty sure Shakespeare is rolling in his grave over this type of meaningless construction.  Word up.

Top Ten Grammar Errors that Haunt Web Pages

Not sure why or when I stumbled upon Robin Nobles' blog post, Top Ten Grammar Errors that Haunt Web Pages, but I did.  And I found it to be informative and well written.  And I wanted to share it with you.

While Robin's post is full of good information, it's just a beginning.  I'm not sure I agree that the errors she lists are "The top ten," but again, it's a good start.  I especially like that she cites one of my favorite guides, the Chicago Manual of Style (it's available online, so I can take it with me wherever I go).

Some of the items Robin mentions will be obvious to many of you.  Some are a little more pedantic -- and may even seem petty to some.  If you know me, you know I'm a recovering prescriptivist.  That is, I'm working on overcoming my obsession with and insistence on absolutely correct grammar.  Put another way, I guess you could say I'm a reluctant and wobbly descriptivist.

But good grammar is the foundation of good writing, and good writing is unmistakable.

So take a look at Robin's post. 

Then take a look at your own blog, or your own Web site, or anything else you write.  And make sure your pages aren't haunted by these grammar goblins.

Even the Big Guys Need a Good Copyeditor

Copyeditors are so important.  Why don't people just realize it and take the time to do it right: have a copyeditor (or a proofreader) look at what's going to be published or sent out? 

Even the "big guys" prove over and over again that they need good copyeditors.  The problem is, with the "big guys," no one seems to be accountable.  With all the layers of little guys, medium guys, and big guys, it's often difficult (perhaps intentionally) to get to the root of the problem.

Take, for example, a form letter I received from Highmark/Blue Shield in connection with an application for health insurance.  Here is the excerpt that confused and, quite frankly, really irritated me.

The Following Information is needed to complete your application/renewal:

*Please provide us with one month's worth of income from the past 60 days.

There are so many things wrong with that excerpt, I don't know where to begin. 

First, and most annoying, they've asked me to provide them with "one month's worth of income."  Are they really asking me to send them money?   Do they expect me to provide them with a month's worth of my earnings?  Or do they want <proof> of income?

Second, why capitalize "Following Information?"  Is it a proper noun, a title, somebody's name, the beginning of a sentence?  No, it is none of those.

Third -- and maybe -- I'm being a bit pedantic here, but it's usually a good idea to avoid the passive voice.  As in "information is needed."  As a reformed prescriptivist, I'm okay with breaking some of the rules.  But in this case, I think the active voice would have been much more appropriate.

With all the recent debate about health care and health insurance, I would think a big company like Highmark/Blue Shield would want to put their best face on.  Instead, I get poorly written form letters like this from them. 

Let me copyedit that for you, Highmark/Blueshield:

We need the following information to complete your application/renewal:

*Please provide us with proof of one month's income earned during the past 60-day period.

See .... This all could have been avoided with a good copyeditor.

Quality Assurance in Communication

"This call may be monitored [or recorded] for quality assurance."

Who hasn't heard those words before, when dealing with any number of businesses on the telephone.  Well, I heard those words the other day, and I'm still scratching my head.


Now don't get me wrong -- I'm all for quality control when it comes to communicating.  After all, without our good words, without stress and emphasis, without phonetics, where would we be?  Still trying to invent the wheel, I imagine.


So, yes, I'm glad to know that some companies want to ensure that their employees are communicating well.

But the other day, I received a phone call from a "computer" who works for RiteAid.

I'll call the computer I spoke with "Alice."  Because Alice respects my privacy, she asked me to enter my zip code.  I did.  Alice then asked me to press "1" if it was"Cassie Tuttle" she was speaking with.  I looked around and confirmed I was me, and I pressed "1."  Alice then explained that my prescription was due to have been filled a couple of days ago, and did I want the pharmacy to fill the prescription.  Yes?  Press "1."  No?  Press "2."  After I pressed "2," Alice thanked me and reminded me that if I had any questions, my pharmacist would be pleased to help me.  Then Alice said, "goodbye," and I said, "goodbye," and we ended our call.

I wonder if Alice passed the quality assurance test in the eyes of her employer.

Slamming Results in Blog Break

Although I've been away from my blog for a while, it's not by choice.  Believe me: I have plenty of ideas and grammar and usage tips I want to share with you.

But in mid-August, I got slammed (in a good way) with three copyediting projects.  So I've been busy meeting deadlines and keeping old (and new) clients happy.

All three projects are law related (one of my areas of expertise), and I'm learning a lot in both the areas of subject-matter and behind-the-scenes publishing matters.

Meanwhile, I look forward to getting back to blogging.  Stay tuned!

A Magic Word

I learned a new word today.  Never before have I heard this word.

This word is all about wonderworking.  About miraculous or magical powers.

The new word is "thaumaturgy."

According to the ArcaMax Word of the Day:

thaumaturgy \THAW-muh-tuhr-jee\ (noun) - The performance of miracles or magic.

For example --
"That's where I was really good -- thaumaturgy.  Thaumaturgy is traditional magic, all about drawing symbolic links between items or people and then investing energy to get the effect that you want." ~Jim Butcher, "Grave Peril"

Thaumaturgy comes from the Greek words for "wonder" (thauma) and "work" (ergon).  And, a practitioner of thaumaturgy is a thaumaturgist or thaumaturge.  Imagine filling out a form -- and where they want to know your occupation, you write: "thaumaturgist."  Huh?  ...Tee hee.

Now, I don't know if I'll ever have the opportunity or the good fortune to use this word in everyday conversation, or even in writing.  But I like this word.  Thaumaturgy.  I like the way it sounds, and I like the way it looks.

And besides all that, I like magical things.

Words are magical for me.  What makes your life magic?

New Words in 2009

Every year, the Washington Post conducts the "Mensa Invitational" and asks readers to create new words.  This is to be done by taking any word from the dictionary and then altering it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter, and then providing a new definition for the new word.

For language and word geeks like me, this is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.

Here are the 2009 winners:

1.    Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period of time.

2.    Ignoranus (n.): A person who's both stupid and an asshole.

3.    Intaxication (n.): Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with.

4.    Reintarnation (n.): Coming back to life as a hillbilly.

5.    Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bonzone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future.

6.    Foreploy (n.): Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid.

7.    Giraffiti (n.): Vandalism spray-painted very, very high.

8.    Sarchasm (n.): The gulf between the auathor of sarcastic with and the person who doesn't get it.

9.    Inoculatte (v.): To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.

10.    Osteopornosis (n.): A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.)

11.    Karmageddon (n.): It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the earth explodes, and it's like, a serious bummer. (My favorite  )

12.    Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.

13.    Glibido (n.): All talk and no action.

14.    Dopeler effect (n.): The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.

15.    Arachnoleptic fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you've accidentally walked through a spider web.

16.    Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito, that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out.

17.    Caterpallor (n.): The color you turn after finding half a worm in the fruit you're eating.

"We shall intimidate you ...."

I recently replied to a job post on the EFA Job List for a freelance copyeditor. The original ad stated that the prospective employer (which is based in India) is an

ISO certified English language solutions company catering to non-native markets like Japan, ... looking for freelance copyeditors or substantive (structural) editors who are
- experienced in academic editing
- subject experts
- experienced in editing non-native English
- sincere, dedicated, and take deadlines seriously
- Vastly experienced.

 The ad further stated

We edit as well as translate academic papers across all subject areas. And have a lot of extensive knowledge in academic domain with over 6,000 clients and having edited in excess of 15,000 papers.

Our current focus is on the following subject areas:
A. Physical Sciences, Earth Sciences, Geology
B. Law

Copyediting entails correcting the text for appropriate language (grammar, syntax, spelling, punctuation, clarity of expression), consistency (both language and visual consistency), and correct citations.

Well, I am a freelance copyeditor; I am experienced in academic writing and editing, and I specialize in ESL and legal subjects; I have edited non-native English materials; and I am sincere, dedicated, and deadline-conscious. I am by nature a stickler for correct grammar and usage. So far so good.

It is not uncommon to not hear back on many of these job inquiries, so I usually follow up with a “just checking in” e-mail. And I did that in this case, because I felt I was supremely suited for this position.

While I am pleased the company responded to my follow-up e-mail, I’m not sure what to think now. Here is their reply. I think you’ll understand why I’m a little concerned.

 Hi Cassie,

 

Thank you for your email.

Since we have met our immediate needs, we have put the recruitment process on hold.

We shall intimidate you when we re – initiate our next recruitment drive for this position.

 Regards,
Recruitment Coordinator

I’m not sure how I should feel about their next recruiting drive: threatened, bullied, coerced, terrorized, frightened? One thing is sure: if this company intends to market its materials in native English-speaking countries, they are in desperate need of a good English-speaking copyeditor!

Is Grammar Correction a Crime?

Police today revealed that a 57-year-old English teacher has been beaten to death by the check-out staff at a supermarket in La Jolla, California.

An eyewitness said, "It was horrible - the man simply pointed out that the sign reading 'ten items or less' should in fact read 'ten items or fewer' because less means 'not as much' and fewer means 'not as many'."

Police say that following these comments, the check-out staff set upon the man using bundles of in-store promotional flyers and an assortment of frozen foods.  Witnesses are still being interviewed.  So far, six store employees have been arrested.

This is the latest in a spate of grammar-related crimes.  A woman was recently defenestrated by her husband when she pointed out to him that he'd said "providing the weather is fine, I'll wash the car" rather than the correct "provided the weather is fine."  In other news, a 65-year-old lady was injured by a man after she informed him of his constant muddling of the words "whose" and "who's'."

Police are asking the public to be careful and only correct grammar if it is truly necessary or to add sense to complex sentences.

A police spokesman said, "If you hear a double negative or a gerund not logically attached to the subject of a sentence resulting in a dangling modifier, just walk on by. Don't offer a correction; it's just not worth it."
 

"In the meantime if you suspect you have been the victim of a grammar-related crime, please report it to the police."

The story above is a satire or parody.  It is entirely fictitious.  So far.

Based on a post by brat is Kestrel
Published Aug 17, 2008

Rules of Grammar: How Egregious?

 I had a conversation recently with a colleague, and we were discussing, among other things, language and the "rules" of grammar.  We both agreed that with the English language, it's okay to break and stray from many of the "rules."

There are some grammar rules I abide by and some I don't.  Linguistically speaking, I am, after all, a prescriptivist - not a descriptivist.  My colleague chuckled when I used the word "egregious" to describe certain grammar no-no's that I will not tolerate.

From this colleague, I learned that a lot of proofreaders and copyeditors use the word, "egregious."  Never knew that before.  It's a word that was frequently used in my previous life as a paralegal.  Lots of things done to lots of people were egregious.  Lots of actions and statement were egregious.

Based on my legal experience, I thought "egregious" always had a negative implication.  But here, my darlings, is the Merriam-Webster definition:

1archaic : distinguished2: conspicuous ; especially : conspicuously bad : flagrant <egregious errors> <egregious padding of the evidence — Christopher Hitchens>

While "egregious" has come to mean "conspicuously bad," in the past, the word also has been known to mean "distinguished" and "conspicuous."  I wonder how such a good and innocent word got such a bad reputation.

Interesting how words evolve.  Yes?