Katherine Poythress

08 December, 2008

In response to the "grammar NAZIS" accusation...

[In case you haven't already, you really ought to go read Jonathan's post in which he rather forcefully denounces "grammar NAZIS." I then invite you -- no -- implore you to come back and read my response, below.]

Dear Jonathan,

I understand some of your frustration, and I try to maintain an attitude of understanding and lenience toward some misuses and abuses of the English language in this era -- because, as you said, language is constantly evolving.

I am most forgiving in the texting realm; less so in the blogging realm, because people who blog generally have access to full keyboards, complete with a handy backspace option. You will notice, however, that I nearly always refrain from correcting and thereby making enemies of my fellow bloggers. I simply endure, and try to make heads or tails of some brilliant ideas buried underneath piles of misplaced apostrophes, run-on sentences and atrocious to/too/two confusion. The paucity of semicolons I will reserve for another post later on.

Notwithstanding my and anybody else's endurance of grammatical errors galore, the evolution of language does not excuse those who abuse the communication tool. People who speak and write in the language (and want to make a contribution to the already-BEYOND-overwhelming mass of published work -- much of it grammatically sound) really don't have a good excuse for not knowing its (not it's) proper uses.

Plenty of grammarians break language rules all the time, but they do it with precise intention, and for a useful purpose. And you can tell the difference between their intellectual rebellion and the outright ignorance so prevalent among bloggers and other writers of this brave new writing world.

For example, the evolution of a word like "text" from a noun into a verb is an intelligent, useful linguistic development. It demonstrates not only technological and societal acumen, but a keen sense of style as well. The blurring of the apostrophe's proper place and function does neither.

All language abuses, misuses and other developments should be justifiable for the sake of clarity and better communication. Blogging world, take note.

Writing "your" when you really mean to say "you're" only places me under the mistaken impression that you are referring to a <noun> in my possession; how on earth am I to know you intended to address me directly if you do not say so? Confusion of possession/plurality/direct address is a serious grammatical crime.

All that said, I understand your frustration with people who comment on your posts only to criticize your grammar. My suggestion would be to a) make the suggested changes to your posts (heck, I have to proof and edit mine numerous times before I get them right) and b) to retaliate and criticize theirs in turn. This will be good practice for you, and it qualifies as community service, as you're helping to make the blogosphere a better place to communicate.

Incidentally, you claim you do not criticize people for trigonometric ineptitude; however, if they were attempting to communicate a trigonometric concept to you, you would find it offensive if they did not do their homework and understand the concept in full before trying to teach it or use it for an analogy. Otherwise, they're just wasting your time. People who purport to be good writers of things they want others to read ought to at least demonstrate a better-than-average grasp on the language in which they are trying to communicate; otherwise, they should lay (not lie) the pen down or step away from the keyboard.

I chose to post this on my own blog instead of in your comments section, in hopes you might be more likely to read it; and also, because you instructed grammarians not to comment if they only wanted to disagree with you.

Affectionately,

A faithful reader

Recommended reading:

For the mechanics of grammar:

"Working With Words" by Brian S. Brooks, James L. Pinson, and Jean Gaddy Wilson
"The Elements of Style" by William Strunk and E.B. White
"The Classic Guide to Writing Well" by Rudolph Flesch
[more to come later when I have had a chance to peruse my bookcase at home]

For style:

"Spunk & Bite: A Writer's Guide to Bold, Contemporary Style" by Arthur Plotnik
"Best Newspaper Writing" (any year, any editors. My personal favorite is the 2007 edition) -- this is a FABULOUS catalogue of exemplary writing in all styles.
"Writing With Style" by John R. Trimble
[again, more once I've had a chance to look through my library]

02 December, 2008

Why it's irrelevant what ring the president-elect MIGHT HAVE bought his wife

There are several criteria for newsworthiness that journalists use ALL THE TIME to determine whether and how to pitch a story to their editors:

Timing: Is it a new event or development? We're going to skip over analysis of this one, since the "story" doesn't fit the other criteria and it therefore doesn't matter how timely it is.

Significance: Usually we measure this in number of people affected by the story. This affects, at most, five people. Obama, Michelle, their kids, and the alleged jeweler. None of us are affected by his personal decision, and this is a pretty darn good reason not to care. If the reporter thinks there's a good reason we should care, he/she should share that with us. Give impact to your story. Rule No. 1 in any good story: IMPACT.

Proximity: The U.K. is not really that close to the U.S., so they really have no business digging into the personal lives of our president-elect without significant cause to do so. For the sake of giving The Daily Mail the benefit of the doubt, geographical distance is not the only thing implied in proximity. It can also mean that a person/organization's situation is very similar to, you know, a lot of people's, and is therefore a microcosm of a larger trend/threat/what-have-you. A story that demonstrates good use of the proximity factor would be one people read and go, "Oh wow, I should keep that in mind," or "That could have been me." I don't really know of anyone doing that.

Prominence: This is the only newsworthiness criterion the ring fib fits. Because Obama is famous. If, say, Joe The Plumber bought a ring for his wife, we wouldn't -- wait, no, bad example. If your hubby bought you a new ring, I promise you it would not make the headlines. Because Obama is a prominent figure, anything and everything he does is automatically a candidate for at least the inside pages of your nearest newspaper.

Human Interest: Human interest stories can break a lot of the other rules of newsworthiness, because they're tearjerkers, inspirational pieces, amusing ones, etc. Their purpose is to evoke emotion. They often don't age quickly and are relatively timeless. The ring fib neither inspired, amused nor provoked weeping. Also, even for the two people who care today, who is going to care, say, next month?

08 November, 2008

From Bloody Sunday to our first black president

One of the unique privileges to living and working in Alabama at a time like this, is there are a LOT of civil rights leaders who were participants in the most historic events in the movement to get equal voting rights (Selma, Montgomery); now, they have a black president. Following is a glimpse of what it took to get from there to where we are today.

A journey of 2 civil rights leaders:

While it evoked dancing in America’s streets and a new national holiday in Kenya, President-elect Barack Obama’s acceptance speech Tuesday night was met with a quieter joy by two civil rights leaders in Talladega County. Forty years ago they actively fought for the right of black people to vote, and they remember Bloody Sunday as a dark blot in the pages of America’s history book.
“I’ve been like everybody else: trying to savor the moment, trying to understand it, trying to define it; trying to explain it even to myself,” said an overwhelmed Horace L. Patterson Sr. of Talladega.
“It is a dream come true,” said Charles Woods of Childersburg. “I think it is a great day for America. We have truly shown that we are a country; that we’re united, and we have truly lived the dream of the Constitution.”
Patterson and Woods not only journeyed the road that led to the election of the first black man to the highest office in America; they helped to pave it, with their decades of involvement in civil rights activism. It was the same kind of hard work that President-elect Obama called upon Tuesday night for the purpose of remaking the nation, but this time as equals: “block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.” (more here)

25 September, 2008

bad journalism?

My brother knows I'm always on the prowl for examples of bad journalism. Well, not on the prowl, exactly, but I appreciate having examples for demonstration purposes when I'm trying to explain the importance of GOOD journalism.

So Alex sent me this, knowing I would appreciate it: Xinhua publishes story about spaceship launch before event occurs.

I could jump on a soapbox aboout Chinese journalistic "ethics," but I'll simply leave the issue after mentioning other recent missteps:

-Broadcasting footage of a fireworks show during the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony, that was not actually of the show taking place at the opening ceremony. It was pre-recorded, "because weather conditions might render the images blurry at the actual event" or some other such fiddle-faddle.

-Failing to point out that the little girl singing at the opening ceremony was in fact lip-synching, because somebody thought "the voice" girl wasn't pretty enough to, you know, be seen in public. Her name is Yang Peiyi, by the way, and she was "crushed," according to her teacher.

"When the deception was revealed and the controversy erupted, the Chinese media insisted that the two girls were quite content and “satisfied” with the switcheroo. But now comes evidence to the contrary." (Globe and Mail's Geoffrey York, Aug. 27, 2008)