I've never changed, never will

Reader-submitted question: I love ellipses. But I write scripts, not newspaper copy, so it's not as bad, right?

I've decided to write this as a radio column. So you'll have to imagine that I'm talking.

See what I just did? Well. I mean, did you HEAR what I just did? You're HEARING me say these words. And that sentence didn't have very good grammar. But that's OK.

Now, I know the Forces of Evil are still out there. And they can't WAIT to send me nasty messages. So I guess I should explain.

Writing for radio is not the same as writing for newspapers or even for blogs. When you write for radio, you write for the ear. You're going to write short sentences that sound natural when you read them out loud. And most of the time you're not going to write the same way you'd write for the newspaper. That's because you're not really writing at all. You're talking.

There's no punctuation in radio. Only pauses and changes in your voice. So you're not using ellipses at all, really...you're just leaving markers for yourself that tell you to take a breath. You could put commas there, or you could put in a period.

Or you could start on a new line.

It doesn't really matter. And that's because you're not creating something that will be read. You're creating something that will be HEARD.

Now, if I meant for you to READ this instead of HEARING it, I wouldn't write words in capital letters. That would be rude: you'd probably think I was shouting at you. But I wrote those words that way to tell myself that I want to put extra emphasis on them when I read them to you. I'm not using punctuation to give you clues about what I mean. I'm using it to give ME direction about how to speak.

See, there's more subtlety in the spoken word. I can stop...cast around for the right word...and pick right up again where I left off. It's natural. The written word is UN-natural. We need rules -- like grammar -- to help us understand what a writer means. We need extra help, help we DON'T need when we listen to someone speak.

A print journalist has only TWO reasons to use an ellipsis. As you can tell from this post, people don't talk the way they write. Sometimes a quote SOUNDS better than it looks. A writer can use an ellipsis to fix a quote for print. There's only one other time you can use an ellipsis. That's to trail off mysteriously...

(beat)

But a writer CAN'T just stick an ellipsis in anywhere. Ellipses aren't decorations. You can't just use them because you think you need a really long bit of punctuation. And I THINK that's probably what happened here. The headline needed to be just a little bit longer. Instead of re-writing the headline, the editor tried to stretch it out.

Don't think I'm saying that radio reporters get off scot-free. They don't. But they don't follow the same punctuation rules print reporters use.

Now, before I go, I need to be really clear about one thing. That post wasn't about the ellipsis at all. The ellipsis is really not that big of a deal. Yeah, it shouldn't have been there. But really, WHATEVER. I'm not that sort of grammar freak.

That post was about journalists seeing themselves as the only ones who get the facts right, when in reality they mess up all the time. And they KNOW that. They just can't resist getting in a few digs at the competition. Most media organisations do this.

Here's an example. CBC might say that print media reported that Mr. Smith died, but his family says he's still alive. It's just their way of reminding you who you can trust. CBC does this all the time. So does the Paper of Record. But this story was an extreme example. That's why I picked it. NOT because of the ellipsis.

(beat)

Thanks for your question.

YES WE CAN! YES WE CAN!

OK, so I suck. I did not mention the election, which I watched at a friend's house. I was the only US citizen and the only non-lawyer there. Fortunately, I was not the only former member of the elite media who attended.

You already know how I voted, so although it was an emotional evening, I will only mention two details:

• I cried at John McCain's speech. It was gracious and simple, the sort of thing we would have heard from the senator before the campaign began. I really liked the way he chastised the crowd as they booed his remarks about calling Barack Obama to congratulate him on his win. I wish that John McCain had campaigned. I would have voted for that guy.
  
  
• I jumped out of my seat in dismay when Obama talked about the "enormity" of the job he is facing.

Not ENORMITY, Mr. President!

Can we all agree not to use this word again unless we're talking about Nazi atrocities? Let's make that agreement together today, Remembrance Day 2008.

Please.

We may have our differences about hyphenated compound modifiers. But surely we can come together and promise not to use that word to mean "enormous". We never hide from history, we MAKE history.

Thank you very much, and God bless America.

“Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and on our other side, the land — boundary that we have with — Canada."

Reader-submitted question: Your head didn't explode while typing that???

Well, it turns out that I am not particularly good at impersonating Sarah Palin. I have silly rules about sentences. For example, they should have endings. Also, those endings should relate to the way the sentences began. Also, each sentence should relate to the whole in some way. It was hard enough to write run-on sentences that didn't say anything. I can't write run-on non-sentences that don't say anything.

Ms. Palin has an unfortunate tendency to speak in total gibberish, to answer a question about foreign policy by speaking about trade missions and then suddenly veering into God only knows what about Putin rearing his head into Alaskan airspace and then into sending goodness only knows what out to keep an eye on Russia. It is hard to watch. I am having trouble believing that she is actually a governor. Governors should be able to do TV interviews about national issues that relate to their states.

This gets into something that a few readers have been discussing: Ms. Palin's need for media training. I can't believe that she's never had this; it should have been one of the first things she did when elected at the state level and again when chosen as John McCain's running mate. Media training can be done in a few hours and teaches people to give news interviews, especially TV interviews. She's a former TV journalist. She must have botched the training terribly; this is the only explanation for the way they've been hiding her from the press.

Normal people do not speak in complete sentences. Ideas come out half-formed when you haven't thought about what you're going to say. When I was in journalism school, one of our professors told us about a politician who was furious with the local rag: he claimed the editors constantly misquoted him to make him look stupid. As payback, the paper's editors decided to leave all of his quotes exactly as they came out of his mouth. (Ha!) Media training helps people to avoid that sort of embarrassment.

Although journalists chafe at the idea of media training -- just another way to keep the public from learning the truth! -- it actually helps them to get better stories. A person who understands how interviews work will be more comfortable. A person who has thought about what he wants to say will explain his ideas more coherently. A person who has practised answers to follow-up questions will appear to have thought the issues through and made decisions based on facts instead of slogans. This is better for everyone. At this point, I want Katie Couric to be the vice-presidential nominee. I'm pretty sure she knows more about foreign policy than Ms. Palin does.

Ms. Palin's handlers should be fired. It looks like she had no idea what the questions would be. There's no excuse for that. I'm not saying that the interviewer should be providing a list of questions -- far from it -- but the campaign should have anticipated every single one of the questions Ms. Couric asked the other day. They should have done mock interviews with her so she would be able to think about what her responses would be.

Maybe they did this. In that case, SHE should be fired.

Only an idiot does an interview without preparing for it. This is the surest way to end up saying things like "I'll try to find some examples and I'll bring 'em to ya."

It's hard to watch, because I've seen so many governors excel in national interviews. I expect much more from governors and Canadian premiers. Our own premier routinely does national interviews and does very well. Like Ms. Palin, he is new to the job and comes from a small town. Even here in Name of Town Withheld, everyone calls him by his first name. Without a doubt, he would be completely over his head if suddenly tapped as deputy leader of one of our national parties, but I think he would do better than this in his interviews. Heck, *I* could do better than this.

I do have some sympathy for her. There's really no way out of these questions about her supposed experience in foreign policy except to laugh off the earlier interview as a bad case of nerves. Gaffes are normal and everyone makes them. The important thing is to understand that they were mistakes, not the standard for future answers. This point appears to have been lost on her handlers.

One of my friends has suggested that Ms. Palin memorised a bunch of answers and then forgot which questions they were supposed to go with. This may be the best explanation I've heard yet.

"Love ya, Megan, but..."

Reader-submitted complaint: ...you scare the crap outta me. Writers write, editors correct.

You are quite right. Newspapers need multiple lines of defense, and that is why news stories should go through at least three sets of hands before they get to print. The reporter does all of the research and writing, the editor makes sure it is complete, and the copy editor checks the grammar, spelling and other details. When all three people are working together well, the result is usually very good. When they're not, I cringe.

A reporter who doesn't do his or her job is usually lazy, not stupid. There are tell-tale signs, the most common being:

• The same interviewee you've heard a hundred times saying the same old thing. (GREAT! No need for extra research!)
• Lots of cliches. (Why bother coming up with a new way to describe the search for the germ that will cause the next pandemic when you could just say it's like a time bomb? Another day, another dollar!)
• "More catchy, less true" journalism. (The editor doesn't know what's true, right? All he cares about is the way you describe it!)
• Believing a source without questioning him or her. (She says the city's new bylaw is unconstitutional, but you don't have the energy to actually read the Constitution to find out if that's true. Just put "unconstitutional" in quotes and you're covered!)

Reporters are usually pressed for time. They have to file a certain number of stories every day, so they rely on these little shortcuts that end up wrecking their credibility. Not in the newsroom, of course: their editors usually have no idea that their reporters are screwing up so badly. If you really want to know if a beat reporter's doing a good job, ask someone who works in that industry.

Editors sit in the newsroom barking orders at reporters and turning down bad story pitches. Well, the good ones turn down bad story pitches. Lousy editors will just check to see if there's a news hole. Editors are responsible for catching all of the reporters' mistakes:

• When they see the same tired old quotes from the same tired old sources, they are supposed to ask the reporter to interview someone else.
• When they see cliches in a story, they are supposed to remove them or ask the reporter to rewrite the story.
• They are supposed to know that no story is simple enough to sum up in five words. Catchy copy needs extra scrutiny.
• If a source is saying something really crazy, editors are supposed to hold the story until it can be confirmed, not just put quotes around the weirdest stuff.
  

They also look for logical inconsistencies, unanswered questions and sections that are really just diversions from the main point. They pull things into sidebars and oversee teams of journalists. A good section editor will understand how to use photography, layout and writing to tell a story.

Although many people think of editors and reporters as being in competition, they should be making each other better at their jobs: an editor can shape the final product and provide guidance to a reporter who's not sure how to proceed.

Editors are usually pressed for time, too. The idiot reporter has spent HOURS trying to write a story about the break in the sewer line downtown, and of COURSE he filed it late! And now HOW is the editor supposed to fix this mess? This is a true crisis! Is this quote from the mayor or from the director of public works? Who can tell? WHO FUCKING CARES IT'S ALMOST PRESS TIME! That reporter's ass is MINE in the morning!

And that's when the copy editor gets the story. The copy editor is the last person who can fix grammatical mistakes or factual errors before the paper goes to press, and he usually gets only a few minutes with each story. The editor is furious, and the reporter's throwing a tantrum because the headline had to be changed at the last minute, and now it seems that there was NO BREAK IN THE SEWER LINE AT ALL! FUCKETY FUCKETY FUCKETY FUCKETY WHY AM I ALWAYS THE LAST PERSON TO HEAR THESE THINGS???

Copy editors (or "sub-editors") are angels who work behind the scenes. They clean up bad grammar and lousy spelling, and they fix minor factual errors. They may be the poor chumps who give the editor the bad news that the story about the sewer line needs to be spiked or completely rewritten. At some publications, they lay out pages and write headlines. You will never know how much work the copy editor puts in: the reporter and editor usually take all of the glory. The copy editor is responsible for making them both look good and keeping them out of my Little Miss Know-it-All columns.

But, dear reader, this is all in the context of newspaper reporting. I do not expect average folks to have copy editors for their blogs. Please do not allow my occasional criticism for professional journalists to keep you from your creative writing.

"I have something to tell you."

Reader-submitted question: I voted for you in the blog contest. Really, I did. I think your post is the best one. Really, I do. But now I am scared of you. Are you judging ME like that? I feel like I can never show you anything I write! Should I have used that exclamation mark? Wait, is it exclamation "mark" or exclamation "point"? Oh, man. Did I misspell "judging"? It looks like it might be wrong. And should the question mark go inside the quotation marks? Seriously, you are my FAVOURITE blogger.

First, thank you for voting. Everyone else: If you haven't been there yet, please go and vote. I am up for Best Post in the second round of voting. If you voted in the first round, you need to vote again. (Exception: Please do not cheat. If you go over there and get a screen that says you've already voted, please don't try to vote again.) I really do need your help. There are three other fabulous NWT writers in the running for Best Post and Best Blog, so even if you don't want to vote for me, please go over and check them out. The contest ends on Friday night.

Now, on to your question: I scared you?

Really?

Well, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to scare you personally. I will admit that on the day I wrote that particular post, I almost had a nervous breakdown from the stress of reading Name of Paper Withheld's editorial. But I think you can understand why: I read a lot of lousy writing, but that was one of the worst things I've ever seen on the editorial page.

I hold professional writers to a higher standard. Regular readers know that I expect writers to be able to write, and I expect journalists to do journalism. Within those general guidelines, I am pretty liberal.

I am not a grammar terrorist: I do not target civilians for political gain. So no, you don't have to be worried. I am judging you, but not with the same level of venom. We can still be friends.

I lost my power in this world because I did not use it

Reader-submitted complaint: This blog is nothing but the deranged musings of an insane woman. I could get the same thing if I read letters from prisoners.

Well, I suppose that could be true. I've read quite a few letters from prisoners, and their writing styles are typically similar to what you'll find here. Like me, they threaten violence for comma misuse, grumble that some people are walking around free even though they are clearly guilty of gross grammar negligence, and attempt to recruit vulnerable people into their organized semicolon gangs.

Just yesterday, I was sharpening my toothbrush into a shank while considering the best way to deal with indiscriminate apostrophe usage. I have been silent on this matter far too long. I intend to send my manifesto to the New York Times with a threat: If I see one more ad for apple's or pencil's, I may be forced to ambush someone in the laundry. I fully intend to hold that person hostage until the world agrees to stop using the word impacted to refer to anything other than teeth or feces.

You will not deny me the satisfaction of knowing that I have made a real difference. Come here and let me smell your hair.

Name of Paper Withheld is BACK

Today's episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Pull quotes.

It's been a while since I mentioned Name of Paper Withheld: they've been satisfyingly mediocre for the past couple of months and haven't deserved my wrath. However, this lovely pull quote on the front page of today's paper is just ridiculous.

Pull quotes are short quotes from the body of a story, presented in larger font as part of the overall page design. They're a great way to pull readers into a story, especially a story that's a bit hard to understand at first. They can also pull readers into the entire newspaper by featuring the best thing that's been said since the last edition hit the streets. They are the print equivalent of the quotes that air just before the TV news begins. They're dynamic and exciting, and can set the tone for the reader. The idea is to showcase your very best material in hopes of pulling more people into the paper. A really good quote on the front page can even convince people to buy the paper. It sums up the best story of the day in a handful of words. It can be a beautiful thing. Think "I am not a crook" or "We will be greeted as liberators".

Now, let's break down the best thing Name of Paper Withheld thinks it has: "I'd far prefer to honour them than these birds."

Hmmm. I'm not feeling it. Anyone else? For starters, there's no context here. I need to figure out what this person is talking about before I can decide if it's a good quote. That's a problem.

Never fear: It turns out that it's a quote from one of our city councillors, who apparently has a "preference for prominent [name of town withheld]er's over raptors for street names". Hold on. My eye twitch is acting up again. For a second there, I thought Name of Paper Withheld had gone back to using apostrophes as decoration. I'll just glance at it really quickly and look away, just to make sure.

Dammit, won't they ever learn how to use punctuation?

And what the HELL kind of English is that, anyway? Who prefers people over raptors for street names? That doesn't even make sense. The only way this could have been worse would have been if Name of Paper Withheld had used "then" instead of "than". (I have to find something positive in this. It's the front page, after all.)

Braving the story on page 10, I discovered that Councillor Brooks cast the only vote against a bylaw that would name streets in a new subdivision after birds. But don't worry! City Hall is still going to name streets after people! They just want to name a few streets after birds for a change.

This is the kind of hard-hitting news that requires a free press. Hold the front page.

I should be taken out back

Reader-submitted complaint: OMG Little Miss Know-it-all missed National Grammar Day! I am shocked and appalled at this lackadaisical approach to the correction of grammar. Get with the program!!

Oh, dear. It's true.

I linked to Stefanie yesterday but didn't do my own post. I agree: obviously, I shirked my duty by ignoring this important day.

I left a comment about grammar on Phil's blog yesterday, but he made fun of me and now my confidence has been destroyed. Yes. How sad. I may never be able to write about grammar again. The world could be deprived of my important contributions to semicolon and homophone usage. It's a true tragedy and it is ALL PHIL'S FAULT. He knocked me off my game and now I'm worried that I may never get the magic back.

Good grammar is IN DA HOUSE

Reader-submitted question: Yo gramma' lay-dee! What are your thoughts on split infinitives? Are they bad grammar or poor style? Anxiously awaiting your wisdom.

Yo yo, WHAT UP? I got it, dawg, I got it.

I wuz hangin' wit me homeys when dey axed me howta split an infinitive. Yeah, I SAID IT.

Dis is gonna be real fast, 'cause I don' like leavin' my babies in da car too long. Split infinitives is awright, dawg, longas dey make sense, ya knowwhaddamsayin'? Yo! 'S long as da sentence is clear, it's totally cool.

Thanks for yer question. Now, are you gonna pay for my cab, or what? Somebody's gotta pay fer that!

There goes the pickled herring salesman!

Today's episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Hyphenated compound modifiers.

I am asked about hyphenated compound modifiers at least once a month. Of course, the people who ask these questions usually don't know what they're asking. They usually say something like "I've been a lawyer for 35 years and I have never ever EVER seen the phrase 'criminal justice' with a hyphen! Harrumph, harrumph!"

I usually smile sweetly and make a joke about how leaving out the hyphen in "criminal-justice system" would be playing right into our critics' hands. Then I grumpily remove the hyphen rather than argue for the next half hour. I do this only because I know that there are only a few people who would argue that the justice system is itself criminal, and they are not good enough at grammar to notice the error.

We are all a long way from total agreement on hyphenated compound modifiers, even among people who are generally very good at grammar. This is because sometimes you should use a hyphen, sometimes you shouldn't, and sometimes it doesn't really matter. It confuses people, and in their confusion they decide that hyphens make the sentence look cluttered.

A good rule of thumb is that even though you sometimes don't really need a hyphen, you won't go wrong by using one if it's truly optional. This will reduce the uncertainty your readers will have when you use phrases that really don't need hyphens. For example, one day you'll want to say something like "We have two hundred odd employees" when you have a total of 500 employees but only 300 of them are normal.

Hyphens join words together to modify other words, and they really do change the meaning of a sentence. They turn two or more words into a single expression. For example:

• A criminal-justice system is a system of criminal justice. However, a criminal justice system is a justice system that is criminal. It's probably not a good idea to write this phrase into an ad unless you're an activist.
  
• English-language learners are people who are learning the English language. English language learners are English people who are learning any language.
  
• On-site visits are visits to the site of an activity. On site visits are -- well, nothing really, just words that have been slapped together but make no sense.

I can already hear your cries of protest. You say that hyphens aren't needed, because only an idiot would be unable to figure out what a writer meant by "on site visit". I suppose you are also a fan of typos, because even idiots understand what the writer meant to say.

Punctuation is important, and hyphens are important. Sorry, wanna-be writers.

Megan is rings like a bell through the night; would you love to love her?

Reader-submitted question: How do you feel about the idiots on Facebook who do not understand verb tenses? I recently saw "Susan Smith is hangover." The last time I checked, it would be impossible for Sue to be "hangover." Do you get as angry as I do and actually call these guys on their stupid mistakes?

Signed TOIUOT (Tired Of Improper Use Of Tenses)

I probably get more angry than you do, but no, I don't usually call them on it. Facebook idiots are civilians. They are not targets for Little Miss Know-it-All.

Facebook contributes to the problem by requiring all statuses to be in the present progressive tense, like this:

• Megan is bleeding to love her.
  
• Megan is looking out for love in the night so still.
  
• Megan is going her own way.

Present progressive means that the action is continuous and is happening RIGHT NOW. You can usually write sentences in the present progressive, although sometimes you'll need to stretch a bit: "Megan is thinking that the walls need a new coat of paint" and so on.

Some people don't understand this. These people end up with something approaching the title of this post. You stare at it for a moment, furrow your brow, and wonder if you should gently explain how to use the word "is". However, I do not recommend this, because your friend may change his status to something like "[name of friend withheld] is a little concerned that people are checking his status for grammatical errors -- you know who you are". You probably wouldn't want that.

Your hangover friend, however, is in a different category: a person who does not even understand the difference between verbs, adjectives and nouns. This person needs remedial help and should probably stay off the Internet entirely for the next few years while he studies grade-four English.

Facebook statuses do cause me a lot of grief, but fortunately it is not for the same reason. Most of my friends have figured out how to use the present progressive tense, so I don't have to pull Little Miss Know-it-All out very often. I am more concerned about the people who provide far too much information about themselves. This is a bit like the semipornographic photos of your former roommate, except that you can't avoid statuses. For a while, I was getting an updated list of one person's evening plans in much more detail than Prudence McPrude could handle. Even now, I squirm when I look at this person's status. I don't want to know that she's (wink, wink) tired, and I don't want to know WHAT the heck "crack filling" could be.

LMK-i-A takes requests

Reader-submitted question: Can you please write about people who use no capitals at all? This problem is particularly apparent in electronic mail correspondence (shift key, anyone?).

Oooh. Yes, I can definitely write about that.

I think this is a holdover from the days when electronic correspondence was just for personal messages. E-mail used to be like text messaging or IMs (where I confess that I sometimes make typos or miss the shift key). It went off into the air and nobody would ever see it again.

Those days are gone, and e-mail has replaced the formal memo. Some offices do almost all of their work by e-mail. It's stored for years and deleted according to a schedule. It's forwarded to your boss's boss and then over to someone else and up to her boss.

This is what Russell Smith, in his quest to demonstrate his solidarity with the common man, calls "a grammatical Pascal's Wager": "I advocate knowing these rules just as I advocate knowing how gentlemen of forgotten social classes used to tie their shoelaces, not because I endorse such pernicious class systems, but because as long as they are there they are going to get you in trouble, and you might as well know about them." Thanks, Russell. You've really helped.

I think Russell is trying to say that when you don't use capital letters, you make your business correspondence look like it might have been copied from a 14-year-old girl's MSN log. This is forgivable when your message is "wanna go for lunch?" but a bit of a problem when your message is "upon review of your file, i have determined that there are reasonable grounds to proceed with a class-action lawsuit against dr. smith. also, i believe that we should pursue punitive damages. what do you think? plaintiffs rawk!".

Give me the strength to lay this burden down

Today's Episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Extraneous Capitalization.

You Probably Know What I'm Talking About. Not Just Eckler's Fondness For One. Word. Sentences. But Something Even Worse: Sentences With Randomly-Capitalized Words.

A reader sent me a special request about this yesterday. She cannot stand these offenses against grammar, and actually took notes about the lousy signs as she was riding home from work. A few of the worst:

• Positions Perfect for University and College Students
  
• Avoid the Back-to-School Parking Crunch
  More Services from Strathcona Station
  Try a Local Bus Route
  
• "All Your Automotive Needs" (Is this a cruel joke?)
  

I'm not sure why people like to use capital letters, but I do have a theory. People notice that titles are capitalized, like "Mayor Guiliani". They assume that if something's important, it must need a capital letter. That's why I spend my days editing documents that look like this:

Losing her Children last Week apparently woke Britney Spears up to the Fact that she needs to Change her Ways. It turns out that all this time Britney had no Natural Maternal Instincts. Really? I thought using your kid’s head as an Ashtray was as natural as Breast-Feeding. Who knew?

Okay, so I don't maintain a celebrity blog, so I don't actually edit anything like this. The documents I have to edit usually end with "before turning the gun on himself". Or, to be more specific, "before turning the Gun on himself".

If Little Miss Know-it-All can teach you nothing else, let it be this: Punctuation marks and capital letters are not mere decoration to be sprinkled into a document to make it look important. There are actual rules that will tell you how to use these things. Even if Russell Smith, grammarian for the common man, has claimed that they amount to "mystifying thickets of technical language", the rules still exist.

A good rule of thumb is that you need a reason to use a capital letter. You do not put capital letters on words to show that they are important. You only put them on the following types of words:

The first word in a sentence. Like this. Or this. See how easy that was?

Emphasized words. LIKE THIS, YOU MORON.

Proper names and titles, but not general descriptors. A proper name refers to one person. JUST TO ONE PERSON. For example, Dan might be a lieutenant. That would make him Lieutenant Dan. Or Jody might be a doctor. That would make her Dr. Jody.The same rules apply to proper nouns: it's just a bridge unless it's the Golden Gate Bridge or some other bridge with a name.

Countries and languages. In Canada, we speak French and English, and we go dutch on french fries and danishes. See what I did there? A word that's capitalized in one context (languages) can be un-capitalized in a different context (general descriptors).

The major words in book, play, or song titles. "Return of the King" and so on. Usually in this case, you don't put capital letters on "a", "of", "to", "the" and so on, unless it's the first word in the title.

Names of days or months. Do you really need an example here? I suppose if you don't know how to use capital letters, you might.

People who actually get excited about grammar (unlike SOME wannabes I can think of) know there is a seething underbelly of discontent about the use of capital letters and punctuation in brand names. For example, did I buy my jeans at GAP or at The Gap? (Answer: Neither. Their pants are made for women without hips.) But Michael plays with Legos, not LEGO brand blocks, and Glen doesn't live in "Saskatchewan!".

We make all of our suns the same. Everyone will suffer the fire we've made.

Today's episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Take your time. Wait for the dark of night.

(Okay, so I'm just having fun with the fetishists now.)

Today's episode is about our favourite would-be grammarian, Russell Smith. Russell is still trying to convince people that he actually knows something about the English language. His latest column does not disappoint. A reader sent it to me at work on Thursday, possibly to test a hypothesis involving the explosion of my head.

In typical form, Russell begins by explaining that he is super awesome and quickly moves into a discussion about how some part of the English language bores the hell out of him. Today it's hyphens, but tomorrow it'll be capitalization or the meaning of the word "that". You see, Russell is a grammarian for the common man. He has explanatory passages marked in reference books. Apparently, while he was reading these books, he missed the explanatory passages about semicolon usage, but now I'm getting distracted.

Russell does not worry about vagaries, and has declared hyphens "not grammar". Well, this is really quite helpful. The next time I'm confused about the English language -- perhaps the use of question marks in declarative sentences -- I will simply proclaim that it is not grammar. That way, I can make as many stupid errors as I want while looking down my nose at anyone who would dare to criticise me.

I don't follow Russell's columns closely enough to be able to say this with any degree of accuracy, but I am willing to bet twenty dollars that he has recently misused a hyphen in print and that a reader pointed out the error. It is the only possible explanation when a so-called (note hyphen) grammar expert suddenly claims that hyphens are silly. And when the "expert" is Russell, betting on a grammatical error is a sure thing.

Help 4 U

The things that really count

PLEASE NOTE: This story includes a few community names. As usual, I'm using hyphens to thwart the search engines.

Today's episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: The little things.

As usual, Name of Paper Withheld is doing a realy bang-up-job att editing. Off course, it realy doesn't matter as-long as you get thestory.

My analysis is in bold text.

Blondin's coming together in Yk, Ndi-lo
Two day family reunion will bring together old and new family members

The point of a headline is to grab the reader's attention and to give some clues about what will be in the story. Consider this one a success, Name of Paper Withheld! Apostrophes are just decoration! Hyphens are boring -- who needs them? Not you!

This headline grabbed my attention right away and really did give some clues about what would be in the story: grammatical error after grammatical error. This is especially important in a story like this one, which will probably be cut out and put on refrigerators and in scrapbooks. My hat is off once again.

The extended Blondin family and friends are being encouraged to make a trip to Name of Town Withheld and Ndi-lo for July 13 and 14. Ted Blondin, son of George Blondin a Dogrib elder, storyteller and writer, is arranging the family reunion for his father who is 85-years-old.

Did the Blondin family get extended somehow? I'm picturing a bunch of ten-foot elders mincing around like characters from "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory". I suppose this is part of a newspaper's job: to let me know about important local events.

The family is encouraged to come here ON July 13 and 14. Not "for". They're coming FOR a celebration, not for a date on the calendar. The second sentence is missing a couple of commas, but more than makes up for it with some added hyphens. You see, when you're a professional journalist, it's really important to get the right number of punctuation marks into your story. It's not so important to use those marks in the right places.

“We wanted to do something this summer,” Ted said of the reunion. The event isn’t being held for an anniversary, but mainly because George is one of the eldest members of the Blondin family.

“My father is 85-years-old. He’s the oldest family member that is still alive.”

There you go again with the hyphens! It's like you think they belong there or something! I imagine this was a tough call for the copy editor. He probably stared at a copy of "The 40-Year-Old Virgin" and bit his lip before triumphantly adding those hyphens. Great investigative work! And wait a second -- the party's not for an anniversary, but it's to celebrate the oldest family member's birthday. Hmmm.

Friday will see a social gathering at the Royal Canadian Legion in Name of Town Withheld which will feature an open mic for people to share stories, Ted said. Saturday will be a large barbecue at the property of George’s sister Muriel Betsina in Ndi-lo.

Again, commas are totally not needed. They just slow the reader down. Good call. But isn't it a HUGE story that this family is able to turn days of the week into barbecues? That would definitely be a first.

“We’re starting to fill up the freezers with caribou meat,” Ted said. He said they’ve already received some interest from family members from outside of town, but he doesn’t know how many yet will attend. “For them to actually agree to come together like this it’s a pretty big deal,” he said. Some family members would be flying in from De-line, which costs approximately $1000 for the flight.

“The number (of people coming) just seems to grow.”

No. Ted doesn't know how many will attend YET. And the flight costs $1000.

George resides in Beh-choko (R-ae-Ed-zo). His younger sister Betsina resides in Ndi-lo where the second day of the reunion will be held. Originally she and George were from the shores of De-line.

You don't usually see the word "reside" in newspapers, but Name of Paper Withheld is not your average news-gathering organization. For example, commas are still beneath them.

“The Blondin’s moved to Name of Town Withheld in the ‘50’s. Especially George and his wife and his kids,” she recalls. She said George moved to Name of Town Withheld in order to pull his children out of residential school. She was in a residential school from the age of eight to 16 until her parents moved to Name of Town Withheld as well. “I have so many nieces, nephews, fourth generation cousins that I’ve never met. I hope they come,” Betsina said.

You never mess with a quote. That's one of the big-R Rules of Journalism. However, people don't use punctuation marks when they speak, so even if the reporter happens to be interviewing someone who thinks apostrophes are just decoration, the reporter is under no obligation to include those apostrophes in his or her copy. Or the headline. The same rule applies to hyphens. And I'm getting tired of expressing my gratitude for those dropped commas that were just slowing us all down.

Ted said that his father will be sharing stories with his family, and other family members are encouraged to share their own stories with one another. The open mic will also be available for anyone that wishes to speak on Saturday.

“I’m looking forward to the excitement of the reunion,” Betsina said.

Here's a good lesson for people who work at community newspapers: It's not nice to call people "that". Anyone WHO wants to speak will be able to speak.

Wasn't this the paper THAT went on and on about the importance of literacy a few months ago? I can't remember...

Throwing down the gauntlet

Today’s episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Things you should just know.

Someone – I’m not saying who – has put enmity between Glen and me. Actually, I’m probably the one at fault. I just can’t stop picking on Russell Smith. Glen, for his part, has suggested that Russell would cut me down with one disparaging glance at my wardrobe. This is probably true, but I cannot let him pretend to be a grammar expert any longer.

The best part is that Russell’s copy editor is still refusing to correct his shoddy grammar and is now placing grammatically-incorrect headlines on his columns. As you can imagine, this has put Russell into a difficult position. He must defend the errors while maintaining that he is the resident grammar expert at Canada’s Newspaper Of Record.

I think this is hilarious. Glen is unimpressed and thinks I am being unnecessarily harsh. I pointed out that Russell had to look up the meaning of the word “that”; Glen responded by asking me to define the word.

I thought for a moment and realized that I couldn’t come up with a snappy definition. I responded that “that” is a word that people should just know how to use. I then turned to my trusty dictionary, which did not provide a definition but provided a few dozen usage examples. Unsurprisingly, I am forced to conclude that I was right: there are some things a writer should just know.

Russell didn’t come up with a definition when he checked his dictionary, either:


The patterns for that and which are made up of strange rules that took me a while to master even as an adult. I get it wrong all the time. The standard explanation involves saying that you use which for a "non-restrictive clause" and that for a "restrictive clause." Well, that's helpful, isn't it?

{Preening self-congratulatory pap about how Russell is smarter than everyone else withheld.}

Here's the simplest demystifier I can come up with. First, note that if you are looking this one up, you are looking up "that" as a relative pronoun, not as an adjective, an adverb or a conjunction. Then, when you come across all this bafflegab about restrictive and non-restrictive (sometimes called defining and non-defining), think of it rather as essential versus non-essential.


Ah, Russell, what would we do without you? Today’s column is fabulous. I love the way you’ve taken up all of the available space with your ridiculous argument that grammar mistakes are OK when they’re in or near your column. It’s almost as if you have no idea how to admit that you were wrong.

My dear readers, you deserve better than this.

Newspaper space is precious, so copy editors need to cut columns like Russell’s down to size. Even on the best of days, his column is nothing more than a celebration of self: Look at me. Man, I’m good. Go ahead, ask me how I tie my shoelaces. Ah, you want to know how I carry my umbrella? Of course you do. Don’t complain about the way I use commas: I’m on the cutting edge of grammar. Hold on a second while I look up the proper way to use capital letters.

Sorry, Russell. There are some things you should just know. If you don’t know them, you’re not an expert, you’re just a poser.

Grammar: a way of putting words together so they make sense, especially to people who can't really read or people who just need a little extra help.

Today’s episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Compound-complex sentences.

I’m sure that, like me, whenever you have a question about life, whether it be urgent or trifling, you immediately ask yourself one question, and that question would be, in all likelihood, “What would Russell Smith do?”, unless, of course, like me, you cannot stomach any more of his preening pomposity.

I’m now convinced that whoever edits Russell’s newspaper column has a wicked sense of humour. This is a person I want to meet. He or she is no longer correcting Russell’s grammar, and I love it.

As my Canadian readers may know, Russell is the self-appointed Canadian fashion guru who has recently styled himself (ha!) a grammar expert. I called him out on this when he had to look up the meaning of the word “that”, but he is still going strong and now has his own show on the national broadcaster. What will it take to stop him?

I’ll concede that Russell is very knowledgeable about important topics such as fingernail length and hair colour, but he is no grammar expert.

I see from his latest column that he has figured out how to use commas, semicolons and dashes. This is excellent progress, but the key to good grammar is that nobody should notice it. Russell, you’ve finally figured out how to use the word “that”, but you’re a little too excited about punctuation for my liking.

Let’s review a sample sentence:

The popularity of look-at-me blogs and Facebook pages, the culture of exhibitionism that the Web promotes, it is said, are all part of this and give rise to a disproportionate valorizing of celebrity, and it is this that makes teens crazy, literally crazy, for fame.

Whew!

Since I’m clearly part of this “culture of exhibitionism”, I’m going to expose my own credentials: I’ve been working full-time as a writer for the past eight years and have an honours degree in journalism from a respected Canadian university. They call this a “four-year BJ”, and many of my readers have indicated that they want one, too. Sucks to be you. The point is, I like to think that I know something about writing, and, my friends, I can guarantee that, according to accepted standards, Russell’s columns, frankly, leave a lot to be desired, at least for those of us who appreciate, really appreciate, clear writing.

Journalists usually make an effort to keep their sentences short, like this:

The popularity of look-at-me blogs has created a culture of exhibitionism. This makes teens crazy, literally crazy, for fame.

I love commas. I really do. They create lists, form compound sentences, and, best of all, allow writers to provide commentary on their own writing. But when reading Russell’s column, I am reminded of a kindergartener:

Today I was looking at the Internet, and I thought it was bad, and I figured that everyone wants to be famous, and that would be bad, and people are going crazy, and that’s bad, and some guy TOTALLY shooted a bunch of people!

Russell, you’ve got an entire column to fill every few days. There’s no need to pack every possible idea into a single sentence. It’s great to see that you’ve figured out how to use dependent clauses, but you might want to try cutting back to one or two per sentence. While you’re at it, you should put your thesaurus away and focus on making your columns easier to read. Your schick is wearing thin.

THE ISSUE: Literacy problems WE SAY: Can be overcome

Today's episode of Little Miss Know-it-All: Kids should learn to read good.

I am still pretty upset and wasn't planning to blog tonight until I opened Name of Newspaper Withheld. Someone has to stop them. This is just too much.

I swear that this is 100% real. My analysis is in bolded text.

Read on Fort Res

Oh. My. Gawd. This is the honest-to-goodness title of the editorial about how important literacy is. Do they really want me to read on top of Fort Res? Or did they, I dunno, FORGET A COMMA??? And in case you were wondering, the title of this post is the little nugget of wisdom beneath the title.

Literacy program success should be modeled around the territories

Headlinese exists only in the newspaper world. It's a way of saying something in as few letters as possible, and it should only be used when there's no other choice. In this case, it would be better to say "Successful literacy program should be a model for the territories". My re-write is even shorter and (who woulda thunk?) makes more sense.

Reading is an important part of anyone's life. Poor reading and comprehension skills have serious affects on a person's ability to function in society. Career, schooling, entertainment, going for groceries, even reading this editorial can become a frustrating chore if literacy skills have not been properly developed.

AAAAAHHHHH!!!! EFFECTS! EFFECTS! NOT AFFECTS!!! OH. MY. GAWD. DON'T MAKE ME COME DOWN THERE AND BEHEAD YOU. I REALLY MIGHT DO IT THIS TIME.

And here's something you might not have known about parallel construction: It only works if everything in the list is in the same form and actually makes sense with the rest of the sentence. Answer me this: is "Career can become a frustrating chore if literacy skills have not been properly developed" a sentence? Actually, don't answer that. I don't think I want to know what you would say.

I'd agree that reading this editorial is a frustrating chore, but not for the reasons you've mentioned.

As of 2005, according to the International Adult Literacy and Skills Survey, 40 per cent of Canadians struggle with low literacy. Of those statistics, 15 per cent have difficulty dealing with any written material.

15 per cent of which statistics? Or do you actually mean that 15 per cent of the 40 per cent have difficulty? I'm guessing that this made your head spin, and you probably didn't use that calculator feature on your computer to figure out that this means that 6 per cent of Canadians have difficulty dealing with any written material. I wonder how many of the 6 per cent work for Name of Paper Withheld.

That same survey revealed that 69 per cent of aboriginal people in the NWT have what are considered lower than average English or French literacy skills.

I'm frothing at the mouth, but I will pay you a compliment (not a complement): Thanks for remembering that CP style is "per cent", not "percent". You might want to think about looking up the correct way to spell "lower-than-average" when used as a modifier, though.

This is why a program, which has been offered at Deninu school in Fort Resolution, should be encouraged, supported and perhaps modeled elsewhere in the territory.

Nice try with the first two commas, but please read that sentence again. You don't actually need them in this situation. And when I say that you don't actually need them, I mean that you shouldn't use them. Please fix that while I'm still asking nicely.

For the past three years, 'Balanced Literacy' has helped increase literacy skills for students.

That would be "students' literacy skills".

According to principal Moh Odeen, students meeting Alberta literacy achievement testing standards in Fort Resolution rose from a dismal 40 per cent in 2004 to an impressive 80 per cent in 2006.

I think you mean "the percentage of Fort Resolution students who met Alberta's literacy standards rose from a dismal 40 per cent in 2004 to an impressive 80 per cent in 2006." And while we're on the topic, it's nice to know that you think 40 per cent is a dismal grade. So far, every single one of your paragraphs has had a serious error. I think that's pretty dismal, especially considering the topic.

It's even more remarkable considering the international literacy survey gave Alberta one of the highest scores among all provinces.

Considering THAT, Name of Newspaper Withheld. Considering THAT. I'm eying that "among" but I'll let it go.

The Deninu school program began with students between Grade 1 and 3 and was extended this year to Grade 4 to 6 students.

Here's an exciting lesson about pluralizing words: Just add an "s" and you're ready to go! The program began with students in GRADES one to three. Not grade.

One student in Grade 4 is reportedly reading at a Grade 6 level and other students in the primary grades are devouring words, reading more than 100 books a year. That is a stark contrast to an atmosphere where interest in reading and books was previously weak.

No, it's IN stark contrast. And remember that saying about apples and oranges? You can compare atmospheres, or you can compare anecdotes. You can't compare anecdotes to atmospheres.

Other schools in the NWT should learn from Deninu school's example and model the Balanced Literacy program.

A few newspapers could learn from the school's example, too.

Increasing rates of literacy will have life long benefits for students in the NWT. Improved reading and comprehension will make it easier to enter, and be successful, in a post secondary education program, hold down a job, and conduct tasks common in everyday life.

Life-long! Not life long! And please, please, please learn how to use parallel construction before you attempt it in print. You might want to check your comma placement while you're at it.

Studies have shown that children with low literacy skills also have more behavioural problems. Teaching children to read better and achieve at a higher level will mean fewer instances of violence, abuse and acting out in NWT schools.

Everyone wins when a child learns to read.

I'm not sure that you're right. I can read pretty well, but I'm feeling more violent all the time.

Trying to ha-ha ha, ha-ha ha.

This may not be widely known, but I take poetry very seriously. I've put some thought into what the Pussycat Dolls were trying to say. (I accidentally typed "Pussycat Dollars", which is more accurate than their real name.)

I still don't think this needs to be bleeped, but at least it makes more sense this way.

It's funny how a man
only thinks about the tan
You got a real big heart,
but I'm looking at your part
You got real big brains,
but I'm looking at your chains
Girl, there ain't no pain
in me looking at your mane

I don't give a damn
Keep looking at my scam
Cause, it don't mean a thing
if you're looking at my bling
Ha, I'm a do my thing
while you're playing with your fing-er
Ha, ha-ha, ha-ha, ha-ha

Better? I'm afraid the entire effort might need to be scrapped. Anyone who thinks "same" rhymes with "grade" shouldn't be writing "music", anyway.