Lorraine has enjoyed phenomenal success since publishing her book including television appearances and guest speaking.
Learn how you can publish your manuscript and make your business a success. Sign up to learn more at the FREE Webinar. E-mail webinar@emepress.com. Webinar March 1 2010 8pm (EST) 7pm (CST), 6 (MST) or 5 (PST)
If you’d like to learn more about Lorraine’s book, her business, or her experience with EME, or if you’d like to chat with Lorraine directly, please visit:www.morningpeacemaker.com
I have been a medical writer/editor for 15 years. As part of my work, I consult a variety of Web sites for proper grammar and punctuation of obscure and current medical and scientific terms.
Most medical and technical writers and editors, as well as medical writing firms, pride themselves on the fact that they have X, Y or Z subject-matter expertise. But is it really an essential requirement for successful writing or editing of medical documentation? This is a heavily debated subject within the technical and medical writing communities. The simple answer is absolutely “Yes.”
According to a recent American Medical Writers Association (AMWA) survey, more than 90% of medical writers and editors work for pharmaceutical firms. These firms provide clear, concise and strict style guides that writers are expected to follow to a tee. That leaves the less than 10% of us with a dilemma when faced with the wide variety of medical and scientific subject matters we have to work on.
We work for university-based hospital research institutes, private medical editing firms and professional health care organizations. We are few and far between. As a result, we have to be very good at what we do, because we have to deal with a wide variety of medical, technical and scientific subject matters on a short-term basis. Editing peer-reviewed journal manuscript submissions or writing for specific government grant applications presents particular challenges to us. However, all medical and scientific journals and government granting agencies provide the medical writer/editor with specific structural and formatting guidelines, and often provide links to expert subject-matter resources.
In addition, there are many additional resources available to the medical writer/editor. For example, the Web sites I most frequently consult on expert subject matters are these:
The European Medical Writers Association also has an extensive list of resources for medical writers. http://www.emwa.org/
Government agencies offer specific guidelines for submitting medical documentation. In the USA, these include the Centers for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/ and the National Institutes of Health. http://www.nih.gov/
For example, on many of these sites, when I do a search for “OT-Gls-Lys-Arg-Neurophysin I,” I get the following hit: Did you mean “OT-Gly-Lys-Arg-Neurophysin I,” with the correct spelling, including the correct use of italics.
Expert subject matter is an essential requirement for producing professional medical and scientific documents.
In addition to the essential requirement of having an excellent command of the English language, medical writers/editors need to be familiar with the variety of resources available to them.
Also, familiarity with a second language is essential, since over 50% of medical documentation is written by non English-speaking researchers.
Medical writers/editors should always refer to the links provided by their customers.
Having trouble deciding whether to outline your whole novel in advance or to let the story (and characters) take you where they will? In this article, one of our novelists tells you how he arrived at a hybrid approach that gave him the perfect combination of freedom and structure.
NO “ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL” APPROACH TO PLANNING
When it comes to writing your novel, how you choose to map out the plot is a lot like how you say “potato” (i.e., po-tae-to or po-tah-to)—there really is no one-size-fits-all right answer (though I am partial to po-tae-to, myself). At one end of the spectrum, there are the writers who outline all of the major plot points of their stories before ever writing a single word of text. And at the other end of the spectrum, there are the writers who forego an outline altogether, opting to let the ideas and plot points flow naturally as they go from prologue to epilogue. If one of these options works for you, who am I to argue? Good job! But in my own writing, I have found that a hybrid approach—combining the two techniques—works best for me.
DISCOVERING A HYBRID APPROACH
With Sunshine’s Darkness (my first novel), the idea for the story came to me as part of an assignment in a writing course that I was taking. To be honest, at the time of the assignment, I really didn’t think the seeds of this story would ever mature to a finished product. Realizing that, I sat down at my keyboard and just started typing out content to fulfill the course requirement. Ideas weren’t fully considered, and even the characters weren’t fleshed out (nor do they necessarily have to be when you first start writing your novel). As I typed out the first ten chapters, I realized how much FUN it was to see ‘where the day took me.’ Since I hadn’t outlined anything, I was free to let the ideas that flowed forth take me in any direction. This was great!
Because I wasn’t bound to any rigid outline, there were no wrong directions—just alternate paths.
That meant I never had to worry how new twists and turns would affect my end game (because at that time, let’s face it, there was no end game; just a grade). I was free to be creative—and what could be more fun than that?
Two months later, the class ended. But by then, I was so engrossed in writing my novel that I realized it was a project I just had to finish. I was nearing the halfway point. I was also starting to get knots in my stomach, and at first I didn’t know why. It seemed every time I sat down to write, I had the dreaded ‘block.’ Up until then it had been fun to just sit down and let plot twists flow forth as they came to me. Now suddenly I was tensing up every time I sat down to write. Worse, my characters were starting to stress me out because I didn’t know which direction to take them in, nor did I know the answers to two important questions that kept nagging me: “Who lives in my story?” and “Who’s going to die?”
It wasn’t until I realized that I needed to know what the ‘end game’ to Sunshine’s Darkness was going to be that my stomach pains subsided.
For several days, I focused on mapping out the second half of the book, writing down explicit scenes that each of my main characters would experience, all the way to the final chapter. In many ways, my novel was finished—insofar as the plot was concerned. Now all I had to do was fill in those scenes with prose and I would be done.
What started out as free-flow writing for the first half of my novel blended into a near-rigid outline for the latter half. If someone had told me to outline this novel from the beginning, I don’t think I could have done it. After all, it was the process of discovering who my characters were and what my story was really about that solidified where I would ultimately go with the second half of Sunshine’s Darkness. That freedom to let the plot—and the characters—develop was vital to my story. Likewise, if I had continued a free-flow style of writing, it would have been impossible for me to calculate the exact moments when major plot twists needed to occur in order for certain characters to end up where they needed to be. Put another way:
Without the free-form development of the first half, my story would never have taken off; but without the careful outline of the second half, it would never have been able to land.
By adopting the use of the outline for the second half, I was able to weave together the story that had developed freely in the first half, bringing the story to a satisfying and logical conclusion.
FINDING YOUR OWN APPROACH
This hybrid approach is what worked for me; that doesn’t mean it will work for you—or that it will work for you in just the same way.
If you decide to follow my method, you need not follow it to a tee. For example, you might choose to outline in the beginning a few key scenes that you want to take place, while still allowing your characters and plot to develop freely around those scenes. I didn’t do this for Sunshine’s Darkness, but with my second novel I did: I began the novel by outlining three key scenes—and the order I needed to tell about them in order to move the plot along. Likewise, you don’t need to slavishly follow your structured outline in the second half of your book if you come up with some amazing plot twist or new ending that will blow your readers away. For Sunshine’s Darkness, I thought I knew exactly what the last couple of chapters were going to be; but when I got there and it came time to write them, I found several of my characters were still left hanging. So I created a whole new ending that would weave together the characters who still had these loose threads. When something like this develops, you toss your outline aside and wrap up your book with what works best.
You might choose to adopt:
A free-flow approach from beginning to end (which I don’t recommend);
An outline approach from start to finish; or
Some version of the hybrid approach that worked for me.
But whichever you choose, the one thing to keep in mind is this: It’s the end result that matters. Whichever style you ultimately choose for writing your novel, as long as it gets you to a satisfying, publishable, and FINISHED end-result, then you’ve done your job. Bravo!
So what works for you? Do you map it all out? Do you let it flow freely? Do you have a hybrid approach of your own? Leave a COMMENT to share your own techniques for developing your characters and your stories.
Having trouble finding a publisher? Perhaps you should let your publisher find YOU! In this article, a former acquisitions editor for Crown–Random House and Perigee–Putnam gives an insider’s view of how self-motivated authors are attracting the attention of publishers—even in today’s economy.
Changes in the Publishing Industry
Back in the good old days of publishing, there were editors, publishers, agents and the infamous slush pile. Editors and agents met, usually over martinis and lunch, to discuss writers, writing projects, trends, and whatever other publishing “business” was the sizzling topic of the day. Back in the office, the editorial assistants laboriously read through the slush pile, passing on to the editors any hopeful manuscripts that had come through the mail—the regular pony-express mail, that is.
Flash forward to 2009. There are still editors—acquisitions editors, specifically, meaning those who have the challenge of actually buying enough manuscripts to fit a publisher’s spring, winter and fall lists. These acquisitions editors continue to meet with agents, who continue to represent writers with the hope of selling their manuscripts to the highest bidder, thereby generating a nice income for both agent and client.
There are, however, two notable changes between the editors and agents of the past and those of today:
Because of the current economy, many editors are no longer able to meet agents for lunch. They must conduct business over the phone or via e-mail. Some publishing houses have even temporarily put a hold on acquisitions altogether, preferring to have editors focus on the manuscripts they already have under contract.
Because of restrictions put on them by publishers, agents often feel they can only afford to represent clients whose projects they anticipate will ship many, many books—100,000 is a nice number to toss around.
As for the slush pile? Perhaps an occasional manuscript makes its way via regular mail into some publishing house, somewhere. But considering that many publishers are actually asking writers and agents to only submit query letters electronically, and since, by now, most serious writers have given up on the hope of being discovered without having agent representation, and since less than 1% of the books published actually ship 100,000 copies, well, suffice it to say there’s a whole new game afoot in publishing.
Writers Taking Matters into their Own Hands
One fact remains: Editors, publishers and agents need writers and they must be increasingly clever in finding them. No longer are they served up over lunch by a savvy agent.
Writers, too, must find increasingly clever ways to convince editors, publishers and agents that they have the talent and mettle to make a career out of writing.
So, take the current economy, add the downsizing of many publishing houses, the need for manuscripts and writers, the hand-tied agents who can’t afford to take on new clients and the abundance of writers since the advent of the computer. Shake and toss on the table and one solution will surface: writers who are serious about being published will take matters into their own hands. They will
self-publish
write blogs or e-zines
have a website dedicated to their topics and
be active on Facebook and Twitter
Here’s why:
1.Serious writers write. This may sound obvious but there are many writers who continue to hold the lofty idea that someone will come along and discover that mystery novel they wrote years ago because it’s so good—everyone says so. What they fail to realize is that writing a manuscript, whether it be fiction or nonfiction, is only one small part of the writing business. There must also be proposal writing, query letter writing, self-promotional writing, marketing plans and any other possible way to get your message in front of readers. That’s where the Internet comes into play. If your message and your qualifications are out there for all to read, you have another avenue to attract readers, agents, editors, or like-minded souls.
2.Serious writers help editors to find them. Since a project represented by an agent will cost the publisher more, and since editors want to buy numerous projects and stay within budget, they must find writers who are not necessarily represented by agents. This means magazine writers, e-zine writers, bloggers, self-published and print-on-demand authors who have a track record of selling their own books, via seminars, the Internet, a lecture series or on a table at the county fair. In the numbers game that is publishing, how you sell isn’t as important as how many.
Getting Serious About the Tools of the Trade
If you are serious about writing, get serious about using the latest tools of the trade. Believe it or not, these methods actually put the power of publishing back in the hands of the writer and take it out of the hands of large conglomerates who, more often than not, pander to those 100,000-copy authors and ignore the vast majority of other writers who make up most of their lists.
Have some experience with POD publishing? Encountered any particularly successful techniques for attracting publishers’ or agents’ attention? Dealt with literary agents, acquisitions editors, or publishers? Leave us a COMMENT to let us know about it.
With so much information available on the Internet, do doctoral students even need to go the library anymore? Why limit yourself to the books and journals inside one building when you can have unfettered access to the countless articles available online. More is better, right?
Wrong. When it comes to serious academic research, limits are actually a good thing.
Consider how an article makes its way into a scholarly journal. After it is conceived, researched, and written, its path to the public is only half done; the harder part still lies ahead. The article’s author sends it off to the editor of a journal, who then sends it on to several independent readers—all scholars in the field. They read it blind, not knowing who wrote it, so their recommendations will be based on the quality of the work: Is the topic sufficiently cutting-edge? Is the methodology scientific? Are the most important resources considered? Are the arguments solid? Do the conclusions follow from the evidence? If the readers’ assessments are negative, the article will probably die with them; if positive, the editor will probably get involved and give it a personal review. Perhaps it’s good, but not as good as some of the other submissions. Rejection. It’s Darwinian survival of the fittest of the academic kind. Or perhaps it’s good, but needs some polishing—back to the author for the necessary revisions. And then finally, months later, maybe—just maybe—it sees the light of day.
Then consider how an Internet-based article makes its way to the same public. The author has an idea. Maybe he researches it, maybe he doesn’t; maybe she considers the most important resources and alternative points of view, maybe not. It gets written—maybe well, maybe poorly; it doesn’t matter, because there’s nobody to stop this article from seeing the light of day. The author is satisfied, so it gets uploaded to the Internet. And there it is for the world to see. Timely? Scientific? Carefully researched? Well argued? Based on solid evidence? These determinations are made by one person alone: the author.
Publishing in a journal involves gatekeepers who verify that the article meets scholarly standards. Publishing online involves an Internet connection—not necessarily anything more. Of course, many articles in scholarly journals are made available online—that gives us the best of both worlds. But when it comes to articles written directly for the Web, the researcher must beware: Just because it’s published doesn’t mean it’s good.
The Internet has changed the face of research forever—and that’s just as it should be. But until all peer reviewed books and journals are available online, it would be unwise to fill up that dissertation bibliography with Internet sources. In short, as indispensable as the Internet is for serious research today, don’t trade in your library card just yet!
Have some thoughts on Web research in academic writing? Leave us a COMMENT to share your ideas and your experience.
Many of us grew up with the idea that the splitting of infinitives is always and everywhere wrong—the marriage between “to” and a verb was thought to be a sacred bond that no one dare put asunder. So it is perhaps surprising to read in §5.106 of the Chicago Manual of Style (15th edition), “Although from about 1850 to 1925 many grammarians stated otherwise, it is now widely acknowledged that adverbs sometimes justifiably separate the to from the principal verb.” The example given is:
They expect to more than double their income next year.
The truth be told, the splitting of infinitives in English goes back to at least the fourteenth century, and it is really only a mid-nineteenth century convention that proscribed the practice—a proscription that is now widely recognized as passé. Indeed, it is worth noting that even the SAT, GMAT, and TOEFL tests recognize the acceptability of the split infinitive, and courses designed to prepare people to take these tests frequently point out the danger of automatically excluding the split infinitive option as the possible correct answer. Like it or not, split infinitives are part and parcel of English usage and they are likely here to stay.
So it doesn’t matter if the infinitive is split or not? Well—I wouldn’t go that far! Of course it matters. Sometimes it matters a great deal. The acceptability of split infinitives can’t be confused with the appropriateness of using them in every situation. All that it means is that the writer has to do more than appeal to a grammatical rule; some thought is required.
A Matter of Emphasis
The split-infinitive example that seems most widely used by those who comment on grammatical issues on the Internet is the famous opening line from Star Trek:
To boldly go where no man has gone before.
If mindless adherence to some non-existent grammatical rule is the key, then we could easily wipe out the split infinitive with a simple rearrangement of words:
To go boldly where no man has gone before.
It means the same thing, after all, doesn’t it? Well—not quite. The same idea is conveyed, but clearly not with the same punch. The latter example simply doesn’t have the same emphasis that the former example has. It falls flat.
Perhaps that’s why The Chicago Manual of Style goes on to elaborate in §5.160 why one may choose to split or not to split an infinitive:
And sometimes it is perfectly appropriate to split an infinitive verb with an adverb to add emphasis or to produce a natural sound. . . . A verb’s infinitive or to form is split when an intervening word immediately follows to [e.g., to bravely assert]. If the adverb bears the emphasis in a phrase [to boldly go], [to strongly favor], then leave the split infinitive alone. But if moving the adverb to the end of the phrase doesn’t suggest a different meaning or impair the sound, then it is an acceptable way to avoid splitting the verb. Recasting a sentence just to eliminate a split infinitive or avoid splitting the infinitive can alter the nuance or meaning: for example, it’s best to always get up early (always modifies get up) is not quite the same as it’s always best to get up early (always modifies best). Or an unnatural phrasing can result: it’s best to get up early always.
Natural Phrasing
And that brings us to the other point that must be borne in mind when deciding whether or not to split an infinitive: Strive for naturalness of expression. In this regard, it should be noted that different expectations will apply to spoken English and informal written English, on the one hand, and to formal written English, on the other. What is considered acceptable in spoken and informal expression is often not acceptable in formal written English. With regard to formal writing, it may be said that the default position is still to avoid splitting infinitives, BUT with this proviso: avoid splitting infinitives except when doing so would disrupt the intended emphasis or create an unnatural expression.
Splitting infinitives will not get you arrested by the grammar police, therefore, but neither is it something to be done carelessly. It is a matter for conscious choice. And in making the choice about whether or not your infinitive should be split, the most important considerations are emphasis and naturalness of expression.
So the old rule (if, indeed, it ever was a rule) no longer applies. But the result is not less need for concern over the issue—it is more. In the absence of a rule, what is needed is SKILL.
Have questions or thoughts about this topic? Share them by leaving us a COMMENT.
At EME, one of the problems that our editors encounter rather frequently in all genres of writing is confusion over the use of hyphens vis-à-vis dashes. I’d venture a guess that most writers aren’t even aware that there is a distinction between these two kinds of punctuation marks, so it’s a mistake we find ourselves correcting quite often. And if that distinction doesn’t cause enough confusion by itself, there’s also a further distinction that has to be made—between two kinds of dashes: the em-dash and the en-dash. (Minus signs, negative signs, figure dashes, 2-em dashes, and 3-em dashes all complicate the matter further, but they are of lesser importance and will be mentioned briefly, below). Since the uses of the hyphen, the en-dash, and the em-dash are clearly distinguishable, my hope is to clear up some of the confusion here.
Hyphens [-]
The hyphen really has three main uses:
To separate digits (and letters) in telephone numbers, Social Security Numbers, etc. (although this can also be done by the figure dash, discussed later in this article)
To separate syllables (usually when space requires splitting a word at the end of a line of type)
To join two or more words together into a compound
With regard to this latter category of uses for the hyphen, it is worth noting that the current trend is toward non-hyphenation (i.e., closed compounds) wherever possible. The Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition, §7.90 provides an extensive hyphenation guide; so does the APA Manual, 5th edition, §3.11; and so does the OWL at Purdue University. Because of evolutions in usage, a current dictionary often provides the best guide for deciding when compounds should be hyphenated, when they should be written as separate words (i.e., open compounds), and when they should be written as one word (i.e., closed compounds).
SOME EXAMPLES OF HYPHENATED COMPOUNDS:
one-on-one coaching
seventh-grade class
low-resolution photograph
En-dashes [–]
Longer than a hyphen but shorter than an em-dash, the en-dash is used principally in two ways:
In place of the word “to,” such as with ranges of dates and page numbers
EXAMPLES:
1962–1965
pages 12–16
Genesis 1:1–2:4a
the London–Brussels train
To join words of equal weight (i.e., where one does not modify the other) in a compound adjective
EXAMPLES:
medical–surgical procedure
the Mason–Dixon line
the New York–New Jersey border
a quasi-legislative–quasi-political decision
Although there are style sheets that direct the use of spaces before and after the en-dash, typically there are no spaces surrounding the en-dash; this allows the en-dash to be easily distinguishable from the minus sign.
Em-dashes [—]
There are a number of uses for the em-dash, but ordinarily it represents a break in thought. Like commas and parentheses, em-dashes can be used to set off a word or phrase. There is, however, an important difference: while commas and parentheses de-emphasize the material they enclose, em-dashes emphasize the material they enclose. The em-dash may also be used to separate a subject (or set of subjects) from a pronoun, or to indicate a sudden break, an aside, or an explanatory phrase.
EXAMPLES:
The way that Lisa understood it—if, indeed, she understood it at all—it was a good thing.
And that was to be the end of it—for the moment.
Be careful, however: overuse of em-dashes becomes very tedious for the reader. This is true, in part, because they involve breaks in thought; too many of them gives the reader a sense of literary hiccups as he or she tries to plough through the sentence, perhaps even losing track of what the original subject was. In part, the tediousness of overused dashes comes from the emphasis that they convey. Overemphasis functions much like using a highlighter in a book to highlight every word on the page: when everything is highlighted, nothing stands out. The em-dash is an effective tool, but should be used sparingly.
As with en-dashes, there are some style guides that suggest using spaces before and after the em-dash, but typically the em-dash is typed with no spaces before or after it (as in the examples given above).
Minus signs, negative signs, figure dashes, 2-em dashes, and 3-em dashes.
Beyond hyphens, en-dashes, and em-dashes, there are related marks that occur in limited circumstances and appear less frequently. Without getting into much detail, they are presented here for the sake of completeness:
Minus signs are typically used in equations, and are most often typed as a hyphen with a space before it and a space after it (e.g., 3 - 2 = 1). Word processing software may provide a slightly raised symbol for this purpose as well.
Negative signs also occur principally in equations and are typed as a hyphen with a space before the negative sign but not after it (e.g., -3 + 3 = 0).
Figure dashes are sometimes used in place of a hyphen between digits in numbers and codes like Social Security Numbers and telephone numbers.
2-em dashes are used to indicate missing material, such as a redacted name or an expletive (e.g., Mrs. —— and Dr. —— were both opposed to the measure.). Many word processing programs merge the two em-dashes in this symbol so that it appears with no breaks.
3-em dashes are used in bibliographies and reference lists to indicate that the author name is the same as in the previous entry (e.g., ———. Angels & Demons. New York: Washington Square Press, 2000). Many word processing programs merge the three em-dashes in this symbol so that it appears with no breaks.
Have questions or thoughts about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT.
Is it “red, white, and blue,” or is it “red, white and blue”?
Most professional writers will tell you that’s a matter of style. And they’re right. You may choose to place a comma after the next-to-last element in a series (hence the name serial comma) or you may choose to leave it out; neither practice is wrong. What you shouldn’t do is use the serial comma haphazardly or allow your choice to give rise to confusion in your text.
Even if you choose, as a rule, to avoid the serial comma, there may be instances in which it must still be used. Consider, for instance,
John, a teacher and a lawyer
Does this refer to three people (i.e., John and a teacher and a lawyer)? Or is it one person (i.e., John, who is both a teacher and a lawyer)? If the former, the serial comma would make that clear:
John, a teacher, and a lawyer
The serial comma’s use is commonplace in American English usage, though less common in English of the British variety.
Since, in our editing, we try to bring consistency to the use (or nonuse) of the serial comma to the extent possible without causing confusion, I often get asked about the pros and cons of its use. The biggest advantage to the use of the serial comma is clarity: when all of the elements in a series are separated by commas, there is less chance of ambiguity in the list. For example, if I am listing the kinds of sandwiches I’m making for lunch, only the serial comma ensures that it’s clear what I’m actually serving. Consider:
Ham, peanut butter and banana and jelly
Without the serial comma, this may mean:
Ham
Peanut butter and banana
Jelly
Or it may mean:
Ham
Peanut butter
Banana and jelly
In fact, though I wouldn’t want to try it, without the serial comma it could even mean just two kinds of sandwiches:
Ham, peanut butter, and banana
Jelly
With the serial comma, the ambiguity is removed:
Ham, peanut butter and banana, and jelly
The strongest reason for ordinarily omitting the serial comma is to conserve space. In fact, it is from the world of newspaper writing that the practice seems to have taken its root in the United States. Among others, the practice of avoiding the serial comma is advocated by the Associated Press Stylebook and the New York Times, along with a number of leading British and Australian stylebooks. In favor of using the serial comma are, among others, the Chicago Manual of Style, the APA Manual, the AMAManual of Style, the U.S. Government Printing Office, and Strunk & White’s The Elements of Style.
All things being equal, I’m inclined to recommend the serial comma’s use. However, rest assured that—as long as your intended meaning is clear—neither its use nor its nonuse is wrong.
Have thoughts or questions about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT to share.
In much of the editing that comes my way, run-on sentences are a problem. Sometimes people are surprised when they find me commenting on their run-on sentences, because the sentences aren’t that long. But here’s the thing: “run-on” doesn’t necessarily imply LONG; it has to do with STRUCTURE. And one of the most common run-un sentence problems I find myself correcting is the comma splice: a run-on sentence that is the result of putting together two independent clauses joined only by a comma. While there are some circumstances in which a comma splice may be considered acceptable, in most cases it is a grammatical error.
SOME EXAMPLES:
I didn’t have to get up in the morning, I still set my alarm for seven.
He wanted to vacation at the beach, she preferred the idea of a cruise.
She didn’t complete her dissertation on time, her defense had to be postponed until spring.
Faced with this error, there are really only three options:
1. Join the two clauses together;
2. Separate them; or
3. Change one of the independent clauses into a dependent clause.
Joining the independent clauses together is done with a coordinating conjunction. These are:
and
but
or
nor
for
yet
so
THOSE EXAMPLES AGAIN, THIS TIME WITH CONJUNCTIONS ADDED:
I didn’t have to get up in the morning, yet I still set my alarm for seven.
He wanted to vacation at the beach, but she preferred the idea of a cruise.
She didn’t complete her dissertation on time, so her defense had to be postponed until spring.
Separating the clauses is done by the use of one of four types of punctuation:
the period [.]
the question mark [?]
the exclamation point [!]
the semicolon [;]
NOTE that the comma [,] will not accomplish this purpose.
THOSE EXAMPLES AGAIN, THIS TIME SEPARATED BY PUNCTUATION MARKS:
I didn’t have to get up in the morning; I still set my alarm for seven.
He wanted to vacation at the beach. She preferred the idea of a cruise.
She didn’t complete her dissertation on time? Her defense had to be postponed until spring.
Changing one of the clauses into a dependent clause creates one complex sentence that is not a run-on sentence. Remember that sentences are considered “run-on” not because of the number of words, but because of their structure. In these cases, run-on sentences are corrected by adding words:
THOSE EXAMPLES AGAIN, THIS TIME WITH ONE CLAUSE MADE DEPENDENT:
Though I didn’t have to get up in the morning, I still set my alarm for seven.
He wanted to vacation at the beach, although she preferred the idea of a cruise.
Since she didn’t complete her dissertation on time, her defense had to be postponed until spring.
With any of these three solutions, the problem of the comma splice is solved and the sentence is no longer a “run-on.”
Have thoughts or questions about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT to share.
At lunch recently, my friend was going to the counter to pick up our order. As she left the table and headed toward the counter, I shouted, “Take some napkins.” She couldn’t pass up the opportunity to correct my English: “Don’t you mean bring some napkins?” she asked. Hmmm … good question. Which is it: take or bring?
In truth, that’s a trick question. It’s really a matter of perspective. No, really—that’s not an attempt to be wishy-washy about the answer. The key to understanding the use of bring and take is perspective. Take is used when you are moving away from something, and bring is used when you are moving toward something. Simply put: You take when you are going, and you bring when you are coming.
Please BRING that book over here so that I may look at it.
Would you remember to TAKE this plate with you when you leave?
OK—so who was right at lunch? Was I correct in telling my friend to take some napkins, or should I have asked her to bring them? In fact, in this case (and in many like it), both options are possible. From a perspective that focused on the counter (i.e., the way I saw it), I was asking her to take the napkins with her when she was leaving the counter—i.e., when she was going away from the counter. From a perspective that focused on our table (i.e., the way my friend saw it), she was saying she should bring the napkins with her as she was coming toward the table. Depending upon the perspective, her action could be viewed either as a going away from (the counter) or as a coming toward (the table). And as I noted above, we take when we are going, and we bring when we are coming.
In common, spoken American English, the terms are used almost interchangeably. But in formal, written English, it can be more important to be grammatically precise. If that’s the goal, remember that it’s take when you are going andbring when you are coming. Take that simple rule with you, and you should be fine. Or is it bring that simple rule with you? That, too, depends upon your perspective.
Have thoughts or questions about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT to share.
The very word “thesis” seems to suggest that you’ve got something to prove—an idea you want to advance. So I suppose it’s no wonder that most of my thesis directing projects began in the same way: with a student appearing at my office to propose the study topic, invariably saying, “I’d like to prove . . .” They always seemed startled when I would respond by asking in return, “Why study the issue if you already know the outcome?”
Thesis and Hypothesis
Of course, every thesis and dissertation is built on some kind of insight—some theory that will be proven or disproven in the course of the study. That is to say, every academic thesis begins with some hypothesis. But if the truth of the hypothesis were clear before the study was even begun, then it would hardly seem worthy of the time, the effort, and the trees that are bound to be sacrificed to the project. No, if a thesis or dissertation is worth writing, then its outcome has to be an open question—a question no one has yet answered in the way it is being posed in this work.
Willing to be Proven Wrong?
“What is your hypothesis?” After startling my would-be directee with the question about why the thesis should be written at all, my next question was usually about the theory that had inspired the work. And the very next question after that was always as startling as the first: “Are you willing to be proven wrong?” It’s a question worth asking because it gets to the heart of one of the greatest threats to any academic work: BIAS.
We all know the righteous indignation we feel when we discover that the outcome of a legislative process has been designed to benefit a powerful political lobby—that’s bias. We would be horrified to learn that the outcome of a drug’s clinical trial had been bought and paid for by a drug company—that’s bias. But the same is true of the studies that go on in every area of academia. They are intended to be in the service of people’s search for truth—not anyone’s pet idea or fragile ego. We can never divorce ourselves from the perspectives we bring to our work, of course, but those perspectives don’t have to determine the outcome of our research; if an academic is going to make any kind of real contribution to thought, his or her work has to be free of bias. And that means beginning any serious study with the willingness to be proven wrong. The interesting thing is this: a dissertation or thesis project that disproves the author’s hypothesis is every bit as valuable to the academic community as one that proves the author right. And it is just as worthy of the degree—maybe moreso, since that kind of conclusion makes it pretty clear that the author didn’t rig the results.
Sometimes a topic is just too close to the author’s heart to be given the objective study it deserves. What do you do if you find you care about something so much that you couldn’t imagine having your ideas about it proven wrong? Simple: write about something else! Seriously. Odd as it seems, the things we care most about are often the worst topics for our academic study—because academic study requires objectivity. And where we care too much, our study is likely not to be objective. Those may be the topics we have to leave to someone else.
What Is the Point?
All lofty ideas aside, there is a very practical reason why master’s and doctoral students are expected to write theses and dissertations: to learn (and prove that they have learned) the methods and theories involved in conducting serious research in their disciplines. The thesis is a kind of test, proving that one has mastered the skills required to carry on serious research in this field without supervision. The harsh truth is this: if you cut corners and force results when a committee of professors is going to examine your work, the hopes are fairly dim for honest, rigorous research when your only critics are your own students. In short, careful, unbiased research in the thesis develops a habit that is likely to live on in your professional life—and so does its opposite.
OK. Let’s not leave all lofty ideas aside. This one seems worthy of mention here: a rigorously researched dissertation or thesis might just make a contribution to future thought in your field. I suppose we all begin our studies thinking that our brilliant ideas are going to be striking new edifices of thought rising above everything built before us. Then we get bogged down in the tedious details of the research and begin to wonder if we can build anything of value at all. In reality, your master’s or doctoral work will probably not become a skyscraper of its own in the academic city. But it can be the next floor you build on top of someone else’s work. And if you build it carefully—so that it is solid and unshakeable—it may prove to be a good foundation for the work of someone else yet to come. In the world of academia, that kind of collaboration is how really great ideas get built. And isn’t that reason enough to do our work as honestly and carefully—and that means as objectively—as it deserves to be done?
Have some experience with academic writing? Some thoughts on bias in thesis-writing? A question about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT to share.
As a professor of composition and rhetoric, I’ve read countless college essays. I’ve read students’ thoughts about everything from justice in Plato’s Republic to salsa dancing at the Carnival in Rio de Janeiro. What I’ve discovered in these essays is that while students often struggle with choosing a topic and sticking to it, their biggest difficulty in writing is finding their voice. By “voice” I mean the expression of their thoughts in a mode that fits both the assignment and its intended audience. Conquering this much-dreaded hurdle, however, requires only three simple things: thought, a clear grasp of the assignment, and an awareness of the reader.
First Requirement: Thought
Whether you’re texting a friend or composing the next great novel, what is made visible in the act of writing is a unique mind, specifically your unique mind. Writing, of whatever sort, is a deeply personal act. And that is no less true when you’re grappling with a European history paper or a chemistry lab report. Even when you’re given a topic you find boring, the more you make an effort to engage thoughtfully with it, the clearer your writing will be.
Second Requirement: A Clear Grasp of the Assignment
The second requirement for finding your voice is to have a clear grasp of the assignment. This is important! If you’re confused or the assignment is very general, catch your professor or TA after class or shoot them a brief e-mail and ask for clarification. This is not brown-nosing; it’s commonsense. You don’t want to waste time or valuable fractions of your GPA by writing an essay that misses the mark.
Third Requirement: An Awareness of the Reader
Developing an awareness of your reader is the final component of finding your voice. For most college essays, your professor is where the proverbial buck stops, meaning you need to maintain an appropriately formal tone and use proper diction in your writing. Texting shorthand is not permissible, nor is slang. And unless the assignment specifically allows first- and second-person references, refrain from using them. A word of caution about vocabulary: six-syllable words dragged out of a thesaurus should not be mistaken for a formal tone. Formality in writing involves using terminology that most clearly expresses your thoughts. The goal in writing is always clarity of expression, and that isn’t guaranteed by the length of the words used.
The Key is You
In brief, the work of writing a college essay involves thinking carefully about a specific assignment and articulating your thoughts in an appropriate manner. The key to this is you—your thoughts. One of the most disheartening things for me as a teacher, besides reading papers where “u” has been substituted for “you,” is when students are completely disengaged from their writing, when their “voice” is absent. Whether you’re summarizing the findings of an interminably long journal article or writing a narrative essay about your career plans, be present to the (clearly grasped) task. This will give you a firm foundation for the (appropriately expressed) accomplishment of it.
Have some questions about your college essay writing? Or some thoughts or experiences you’d like to share? Leave us a COMMENT.
There is a vast difference between how users with a high-literacy level read Web pages when compared with low-literacy users.
In my last post, titled Writing Web Content: Scanning Not Spamming, we discussed how the high-literacy user scans Web pages, reading out a sentence here and there—seeking relevance, headings, links, bolded text and calls-to-action. They effectively scan and read only 20–28% of the text on a page.
We tend to make a concentrated effort to cater to the high-literacy user when writing content for the Web.
According to the US National Center for Educational Statistics, 30 million Americans (14%) have below basic literacy skills, and 63 million (20%) have just basic literacy skills. That means that approximately 43% of US residents have a low level of literacy. Do we assume that this figure is also representative of the number of low-literacy users utilizing the Internet? Even considering that this sector may have a lower disposable income and limited access to the technology, this is still a huge number of people who are largely not catered to when we write or build Web pages.
Have you ever watched a person with low literacy reading? They read one word at a time, moving slowly line by line, frequently agonizing over multisyllabic words. I should note here that low literacy does not mean illiterate. If something becomes too hard, they move on rather than become too bogged down-potentially missing important information.
This can also apply to people with certain disabilities and users who have English as a second language.
These users do not scan pages.
Tips for writing Web pages for low-literacy users:
Place important information at the top of the page. It is more likely to be read word for word than if it were further down the page.
Avoid long pages of text. This is too time-consuming and difficult for the low-literacy user.
Keep writing simple and easy-to-read. Do not use big words or uncommon words.
Scrolling can be difficult, as low-literacy users cannot scan to find where they were on the page. Keep this in mind when writing and designing a Web page.
Don’t expect these users to be able to use a search box successfully to find what they are looking for. They may not be able to spell what they are seeking and may not be able to interpret the search results. Often they will simply choose the top option.
As well as prioritizing information and keeping information simple, it is important to keep the user focused on the goal. As low-literacy users tend to move from page to page when things get difficult, it is easy for them to get lost or disorientated.
If your Web visitors are a combination of people from all literacy levels, place all important information and calls-to-action at the top of the page, and background detail further down for those who wish to read more.
Has anyone ever said you should write a book? Maybe you have some interesting characters in your family or a story or two worth telling. Perhaps you were involved in a defining moment in history. Or maybe you would like to keep your children and grandchildren aware of the family’s roots. Writing a memoir can help preserve history as experienced through your personal perspective. Whether or not you feel the reading public at-large would be interested in your story, there can be other reasons for composing it.
Memoir writing not only recounts history; it helps put the events of your life in order. Writing can help establish a fresh perspective and open new avenues of self-discovery. Digging through your memory banks can produce answers to questions that may have bothered you. It may help you locate lost relatives or clarify family events that have previously been a hazy memory. The reasons for writing a memoir are as varied as we are, but the steps needed to put words to paper are the same—no matter what our personal goals. The real challenge, however, is how to get started.
Getting Started
Like most nonfiction writing, a memoir can best be accomplished by starting with an outline. The outline should be chronological and contain the specific people or events you are most interested in writing about, along with the specific timeframe you would like to cover. To start out by trying to cover your entire life is probably not the best way to go, since it will dilute your story and make the task seem onerous right from the start. Once you have a basic working frame, you can begin to gather information to fill in the blanks around the story. Then, if you feel there is more to be added to the story, you can always add to your outline. Think of each outline entry as a possible chapter in your memoir.
Besides keeping the chapters chronological, it is helpful to put them in a natural linking order. For example, perhaps you have decided to write about moving to the United States from a foreign country when you were five years old. Your initial outline might look like this:
I.Living in the USA
A.The physical move
1.where you came from
2.how you traveled
3.when you moved
4.who came with you
5.what you brought
6.why you moved here
Note: Try to write as much as you can about each of these points-not just one sentence. Make notes of the people you need to talk to who can provide more information, i.e. those who traveled with you or those who stayed behind. Try to give reasons for what you brought, why you left your homeland, or why you chose a certain geographic area. When you have exhausted all these topics, move on to the next part of your outline, which might be:
B. Your American neighborhood
Note: Use the who, what, when, why and where approach again to form the initial structure for your memoir.
The hunt for information will probably be both the most fascinating and the most arduous part of your memoir. First, gather all the material you have at hand: scrapbooks, old photographs and family albums, letters, newspaper clippings, magazines and so forth. Separate them according to their relevance to your outline. Next, note living family members who can provide or share more information with you, or make a list of items you would like to research in the library or online. Most of all, have fun on your hunt for buried family treasure!
Have some experience with memoir-writing? Or questions or ideas about this topic? Leave us a COMMENT to share your thoughts.
People form impressions of us based on the language we use, whether written or spoken. Our language choices tell people where we are from, whether we are educated or not, or professional business people or not. This is a universal truth with all languages, not only English.
In our last ESL blog, we talked about “Correct English” and how there are some people (Descriptivists) who believe in the educated speaker rule—namely, if an educated native speaker says it, that reflects Standard Language Usage. Others (Prescriptivists) believe that language should be spoken according to a set of rules (generally from Latin or Greek), regardless of how the current language actually functions.
There is yet another set of rules, and that is the way the language actually works. These are rules that native speakers of any language internalize as they acquire their language from childhood. In English, for example we say, She likes bananas. Most native speakers haven’t analyzed that and they cannot state the rule of the “3rd person s” (likes) in simple, active declarative sentences. However, they know it and they use it. Non-native speakers haven’t internalized these rules and they need to learn them, either for social reasons or professional business reasons.
We can easily hear an accent in spoken English. Accents usually reflect pronunciation, but they can also reflect non-English word order, or non-English word formations. People are generally more forgiving about these issues in spoken English. However, in written English, especially in Academic English or in Business English, these issues become more of a problem.
In written form, non-native English is more easily seen. Sometimes we can identify a person’s native language by the types of errors he or she makes.
Russians and Slovaks, for example, tend to leave off the article before nouns. (I like show. We go to movies.).
Spanish speakers will tend to write or say I have cold instead of Iam cold. Or I have 23 years instead of I am 23 years old. This is because in Spanish, the verb tener (to have) is used in these instances, rather than the verb, to be, as we use it in English.
Sometimes an English word is similar to a word in another language, but it really is not the same. For example, the English word embarrassed seems like the Spanish word embarazada, which actuallymeans pregnant. It is no wonder that Spanish speakers will confuse the two, both in meaning and spelling. That woud be fairly embarrassing!
Sometimes certain errors are universal. By this I mean that, because English is unique in one or more aspects, non-native speakers from various language backgrounds will falter and show their accents in written English.
Third person s: He like cars, instead of He likes cars.
Word order and third person s:She fight all the time her brother, instead of She fights her brother all the time.
Plural nouns: They have two dog, iInstead of They have two dogs.
The above are only a few examples of accent in written English. There are many more. Usually, the correct forms can be learned in a course or from a book. Often, being aware of the native-speaker rules, will help.
So, what can you do? Check yourself on the above structures, or have someone edit your writing for you. Do you make these types of errors? Record yourself talking about a situation or a person. Then write the same story as a paragraph. Do you notice any differences?
Do you notice any of the problems we just illustrated above? If you do, just practice writing a few sentences using the native-speaker models above for these. The first step is being aware of how you speak and write.
Have some experience with this topic? Or perhaps a question? Leave us a COMMENT to share your thoughts.
Interviews are uncomfortable, intimidating, and just plain SCARY! If you agree with this statement, keep reading this blog. I have some tips for you.
Many of us wish that we could go through life without ever sitting in front of someone (or group of someones) to “sell” ourselves. Interviewing is so unnatural. We are taught to be more modest than that, aren’t we? Very early in life, we’re told that bragging about what we do well is a turn-off to others. To a degree, this is still true. No one likes a bragger who is always trying to “one up” the next person. Even in an interview, you don’t want to come off as conceited or obnoxious. But you DO want to come across as CONFIDENT.
You need to be:
Confident in your education.
Confident in your experience.
Confident in your skills.
Confident in your ability to get the job done.
Confidence is a very attractive quality in a candidate. Every successful candidate has confidence. The question is: How can you develop confidence? I’m glad you asked! Here are some tips that I have used with clients over the years to boost perception. (I think my years as a cheerleader helped me out here!)
Review your resumé! A large number of job seekers have written or at least contributed to a resumé. However, not many actually review it. Review it with a career coach, significant other, or friend. Talk about the various experiences you have had and what you were able to get out of each experience. Remind yourself of why that information was worth including in your resumé in the first place. If you determine that it isn’t worth the ink on the page—take it off! But if it is worth having there, be able to explain WHY.
Make a list. What are your skills? (HINT: If you’re having a hard time coming up with a list, go back to my first suggestion in an earlier blog post on transferrable skills. Your resumé may need some help if it doesn’t mention skills—they are much more important to the job-seeking enterprise than the titles you’ve had, positions you’ve held, and jobs you’ve done). After you’ve made a list of your skills, make another list of the skills that you know will be required or valuable in the position for which you’re interviewing. If you’re not sure about this, review the job posting, go to the company Web site, talk to colleagues who have compatible experience, or look up that occupation on an occupational Web site (I suggest the O*NET online). Once you have these two lists, cross-reference them. How many skills match? Are there any skills missing from your list that you can acquire? If so, you’ve got the answer to the age-old question “What are your weaknesses?” You can say, “While this isn’t necessarily a weakness, something I’m currently working to improve is _________.” No one likes to have weaknesses, but think of a weakness as a challenge or opportunity for growth.
Practice. It may not be true that practice makes perfect; but practice does make you more confident. Consider some interview coaching, or at least some role-playing with a colleague or friend. You will have an edge if you have heard interview questions before; that will give you the chance to think about your answer well in advance. You won’t have to deal with that silence that fills a room while you’re flipping through possible answers in your head. Another bonus to this is that you’re less likely to pepper your responses with “Umm …” or “like ….”
The trick to developing confidence is reminding yourself of how great you really are. You’ll be surprised at how much you know and what you’re capable of accomplishing when you take the time to remember your experiences and how they relate to your career path. That surprise will turn into confidence that you can get the job done and should be the successful candidate.
Watch out INTERVIEWERS—here we come!
Have any great interview stories? Some advice or ideas to share? Or perhaps a question for our Career Services specialist? Leave us a COMMENT.
Online users tend to scan text on a Web page rather than reading the page word-by-word.
Every article you read on writing content for the Web will inform you of this.
What does scanning the text really mean?
How does this affect what content we write?
Useit.com reports on a recent eyetracking study which indicates that users with a high-literacy level read approximately 20 - 28% of the text on a Web page. Often the user will read the first sentence or paragraph of an article then skim vertically down the content with eyes stopping at headings, bullet lists, bolded text, links and numerals. Another sentence or two may be read to see if the content is relevant and useful. The captivated reader will continue reading.
Online users tend to be extremely focused on a specific task or objective. They spend the absolute minimum amount of time on a new page to see if it relevant before moving on to another page, or worse - a competitor.
With a limited amount of time to keep the user’s attention on a Web page and encourage them to read, how do we write compelling and easy-to-read content?
Online Writing Tips—in a Nutshell
The title of the page is important. The first two words of the title need to be the initial attention grabber. In a navigational menu or a list of pages, it is the first two words of the title that the user will notice.
Use the inverted pyramid style of writing with the most important points or conclusion first. The interested reader will continue reading to gain the background.
Keep sentences short yet concise. Long sentences are for print material.
Be factual and informative. Most online readers are looking for information or researching a product or service. Avoid excessive promotional language and “land-fill” sentences. These are sentences that are used to increase the word count and have no real value to the reader.
Throughout the page use sub-headings, bolded text, bullet lists and links where appropriate. Avoid massive blocks of text.
Have clear calls-to-action. Users should not have to look for the next step. Users like actionable content.
Use numerals instead of spelling out numbers where they represent figures or facts. This is against traditional copywriting standards but is expected when writing for the online medium.
Many writers struggle with the non-traditional methods of writing content for a Web page. It goes against how we have been taught to write in schools. The Internet has changed reader behavior so we must be dynamic and cater to these changes. A great Web site for more information is the Jakob Nielsen site: http://www.useit.com/papers/webwriting/.
Earlier in this post, I mentioned that users with a high-literacy level scan Web content. How do we cater to the low-literacy user?
One of the most elusive terms when discussing fiction is Voice (especially when it is capitalized). You will hear the word get thrown around in so many different directions and meaning so many different things to so many different people that it often becomes useless when trying to critique a work-in-progress in a workshop setting or within the editor/writer give-and-take. As both a teacher and editor, one of the first things that I try to do with my writers is to settle on a critical vocabulary that we can both understand and agree upon, so that when we get to the nitty-gritty of evaluating and critiquing manuscripts, there are no misunderstandings.
Voice, because of its expansive definition, is one of the most important terms to define and agree upon. Often we hear the term in its more sweeping usage—when, for instance, we speak of a young writer “finding her voice”; or of the “voice of a Dickens, or a García Márquez,” so distinctive on the page that a reader can choose a passage from among many and recognize it as the specific writer’s. On the opposite end of the spectrum, in a much narrower definition, we often hear readers speak of the voice of an individual character—one of the many particulars that differentiate him from other characters. As an editor, I use the term in its more direct relationship to the text or narration, often qualifying it as the narrative voice.
Voice is one of the craft elements that the reader experiences most directly and immediately. There is no story without the narrative voice, whether it is a very familiar first-person narrator or a distant omniscient one. Voice is the lens, the vehicle, through which the reader experiences all the other elements that make up the story. As an editor, therefore, it is important to define this term as precisely as possible, without any of the mythical baggage that comes when speaking about Voice in its capitalized and more mythical form.
Three Modes of Voice
I break the narrative voice into three distinctive categories, which guide the reader through the external world of the story, and through two levels of the internal world of characters. Contemporary fiction depends on these three modes almost exclusively. And as a writer, especially when engaged in the process of middle or late revision, it is important to know the modes the story relies on and the dramatic rationale for such reliance.
The first mode is the descriptive voice. This is the part of the narrative responsible for relating to the reader most of the external world of the story, including the concrete world, the action, the spoken dialogue, the smells, textures, tastes and so on—essentially anything that can be perceived with the five senses. Very few stories can survive without the descriptive voice, since the world of the senses is the stage where most of our stories take place.
The second mode is the reflective voice. This is when the narrative begins to delve into the inner landscape of specific characters. The reflective voice is one of interpretation, processing and judgment on what the descriptive voice has laid out for the reader, whether on an action, a place or another character’s physical quality. Unlike the descriptive voice, which can often belong only to an impersonal third-person narrator, the reflective voice often occurs as a sort of duet, being at once the voice of the narrator and of the specific character whose ruminations we inhabit. Very few examples in contemporary fiction exist without a healthy dose of the reflective voice. In fact, the best of contemporary fiction seems to strike a powerful balance between these first two modes, often weaving them together in the same sentence.
The third major mode is the direct internal voice, otherwise known in literature courses as stream-of-consciousness. It is an internal mode like the reflective voice, but it often attempts something much more radical: to directly transcribe the thoughts of an individual character as they occur. Some writers, like Proust, argue that such a task is impossible—that, since thoughts occur in the evanescent present, they are therefore not verbal or subject to the linear laws of language. Other writers, like Joyce, spend their whole lives proving that indeed the pattern of thoughts could be replicated on the page. In contemporary fiction, however, this remains the least deployed of the three modes, but it is nevertheless a very powerful way to approach certain characterizations.
It is through establishing these clear definitions of some of the most difficult terms in the jargon of workshops and editing that I can more confidently approach each manuscript as a coach and editor.
Do you struggle with the issue of voice in your fiction writing? Or perhaps have a question for our novel expert? Or some techniques of your own that you’d like to share? Leave us a COMMENT.
What is correct English? Is it the English spoken on TV? Is it a dialect of English, such as British English or American English? Could it be a variety within American English, such as Mid-Western English or Southern English?
Is correct English what the grammar books tell us to say or write? Should written English be more correct than spoken English?
The answers to these questions may be “Yes” or “All of the above.” It really depends on who is asking the question and who is giving the answer.
People look at language in different ways. Linguists (like myself) are people who deal with the science of language and language change. Most linguists are Descriptivists who describe what is said in the language. Descriptivists don’t judge how the language (in our case, English) should be spoken. They just analyze and observe how it is being used. Descriptivists don’t judge any variety or dialect of English. They think that American English is just as good or correct as British English and that Mid-Western English is not any better or worse than Southern English.
Prescriptivists, on the other hand, argue that there are certain rules of the English language (many handed down from Latin and Greek) and these rules must be followed. Prescriptivists are often grade-school English teachers, sometimes grammar book writers, or others who believe that the language must not change.
Let’s look at some examples and how Descriptivists and Prescriptivists would react to them.
Example:
1. She thinks different from me.
Drive slow.
Speak clear.
Prescriptivists would say that the use of an adjective instead of the adverb (differently, slowly, clearly) in the examples above is totally incorrect. It should be: She thinks differently from me; Drive slowly; Speak clearly.
Descriptivists might mourn the increasing loss of the adverb in American English, but would describe the above examples as an inevitable product of language change.
2. Give it to Joe andI.
Sally is against you and I
It’s between John and I
Prescriptivists would say that we should use the objective case of the pronoun here (me, instead of I ) because only objective case pronouns should be used after prepositions (to, against, between).
Descriptivists would say that the use of the subject pronoun (I ) is a case of hypercorrection. Because we have generally used John and I in the subject position in a sentence, (John and I are leaving now), it has come into use even when the phrase occurs after a preposition (It’s betweenJohn and I).
So who decides what is correct? What should the student of English as a second language do? As a textbook writer of many books in English for foreign students, as well as a university professor and teacher-trainer, here is my advice:
If possible, learn the rule as stated in the grammar books, but be aware that you will probably hear an alternate expression in spoken English. In written English, try to follow the prescriptive rule.
For example, the polite request, May I have a drink, please? will often be heard as Can I have a drink? The question Whom did you bring? illustrates the prescriptive rule of using the objective form whom, but we rarely use that in spoken English. We are told to use It’s Iin response to the question, Who is it?, but we would sound very archaic if we followed that rule, instead of just saying It’s me.
The English language is changing constantly. We are judged on how we speak the language and how we write it. Generally, I tell my students that Standard Spoken American English is that variety heard on national television in broadcasters’ speech. I think this is a good rule of thumb for educated usage. So, for example, if they hear between you and I in the speech of educated people, it probably means the language is changing and that is becoming acceptable in Standard Spoken American English.
However, in written English, the criteria for acceptability are more formal and closer to the rules of the prescriptivist. In written English, especially in Business English, you should use the more formal expressions.
So here’s a parting piece of advice for written English: When in doubt, follow the rule. In spoken English, follow your ear.
Do you struggle with issues of English grammar and usage? Have some experiences you’d like to share? Or perhaps a question for our ESL expert? Leave us a COMMENT.
Ask someone you know the following question: “What do you do?” More than likely, you’ll get a list—sometimes a very long list—of where the person has worked and what positions s/he held there. Does that tell you about skill level? Does that explain what s/he has to offer in any new situation? No, it does not.
In a job interview, the standard first question asks the interviewee to describe him/herself. I call this your “60-second commercial” opportunity. All too often this is an opportunity wasted, when it is answered with yet another list: “I’m dependable, trustworthy, hardworking, and honest.” I guess the interviewer is supposed to take the word of the complete stranger sitting in front of him as fact: “You say that you’re honest and work hard. Ok—you’re hired!” If only it were that easy.
These two examples show what I refer to as laundry lists: lists of information that don’t communicate much at all. We tend to use words and titles that have had some level of importance in our past lives. We list our job titles instead of the transferrable skills we possess because of the positions we once held. We use those ever-popular adjectives to describe our skills, but forget the actual skills entirely! This is the trap that many job seekers fall into. The key to being the successful candidate in the job search is to put your laundry list aside and refocus attention on your true skills—more specifically, your transferrable skills.
Transferrable skills are those that you have acquired through education and/or experience, and which you will be taking with you to the next position you hold . . . and the next . . .and the next. I suggest that we be selfish with our time and get the most out of every experience—make our experiences valuable for a lifetime.
When gathering information for your resumé or interview, do the following two evaluations:
•1. Evaluate your education:
Did I create or work on any projects, research, or presentations that are related to this next step in my career?
Would the reader or interviewer be interested in this information?
Does the reader or interviewer have to assume anything (degree/school/minor), or am I being clear?
Why is my education any better than that of my competitors for this position?
•2. Evaluate your experiences:
Are my professional experiences related to the specific position for which I am applying? If so, how?
Are the descriptions of my experiences focused on what I am able to do versus what I was expected to do?
Do I have any volunteer work or unpaid experiences that are related to my career?
What about my experience makes me an excellent candidate for this particular job?
After you have had the chance to evaluate these important details, you are ready to start a conversation with yourself and potential employers. You will be able to begin talking about what you can offer to a new situation instead of focusing on the laundry list of titles you have held in the past.
When I am asked, “What do you do?” I say, “I assist individuals in their search for a career fit. I use assessments and one-on-one interviewing to identify strengths, skills, and areas for improvement.” I could have said, “I’m a career coach. I talk a lot. I’m a people person.” But while the latter answer is just a laundry list without much meaning, the former sincerely describes what I can offer to the new position I seek. And in the end, the employer is not so much interested in what you have done in the past as in how your past experiences point to what you can do in the job you now seek.
Do you have a question or thought you’d like to share with our Career Services specialist? Leave us a COMMENT.
Ernesto is a fiction editor and coach, novelist, translator, and professor. Currently a professor at the renowned Sarah Lawrence College, Ernesto has taught in several of the country’s top MFA Fiction programs and has served as coach and editor for various writers who have begun successful publishing careers. A successful novelist in his own right, Ernesto has published seven books: three novels for which he has won several awards, and four novels translated from the Spanish; he has also been published widely elsewhere, including The New York Times and The Washington Post. As an editor and fiction coach, his primary goal is to get the work in the best shape for agents and publishers while remaining true to the vision and voice of the writer.
