Kris Spisak's Blog

Here is one kind of statue of limitations, but my guess is that this isn’t what you meant.

I imagine a woman of stone with her arms crossed and her wide stance as unyielding as her disposition. Is this what a statue of limitations would look like? A force blocking your way? Or perhaps something headless, limited herself.

Whatever you may imagine for this phrase, keep this in mind: you need to imagine something. “Statue of limitations” is something made up. Or let’s be honest, we’re talking about a common mistake.

If you’ve ever debated between “statue of limitations” vs. “statute of limitations”:

The correct phrase is “statute of limitations.”

Like the difference between “Baba Yaga” and “Baby Yoda,” we know slight alterations in spelling make all the difference.

What is a “statute of limitations”?

We’re talking about a law that defines the amount of time one has between the date of an offense and when the clock runs out for legal action to be taken against the alleged wrong-doer. Am I a lawyer? No. Are there subtleties and sophistications to a statute of limitations beyond this summary? Absolutely.

Someone with a legal background could take this concept much further, but this is the gist. Like “case in point” and “for all intents and purposes,” some specialized language has become a part of our everyday vernacular. However, we don’t need law school experience to get this right.

Now maybe you’re thinking about the statute of limitations around grammar policing. Calm down, folks. Let’s just focus on doing better ourselves. That’s always the best strategy, legal or otherwise.

 

Sign-up for my monthly “On Words and Onwards” email newsletter for more language tips and trivia like this.

The post Writing Tip 448: “Statue of limitations” vs. “Statute of limitations” appeared first on Kris Spisak.

Teeming with chaos or teaming with chaos? And how does this change if we’re talking about ducks? Oh, a little letter makes all the difference. The world can feel overwhelming sometimes, but let’s at least ensure your spelling is under control.

Remember, when it comes to “team” vs. “teem”:Team (noun) – a group of individuals undertaking a joint actionTeam (verb) – to join together as a group to pusue a shared undertakingTeem (verb) – to be filled to overflowing, over-abundant, increasingly crowded

More definitions exist than these; however, they seem to be the most common.

Both can indeed use the preposition “with” when acting in their verb forms (“teaming with” vs. “teeming with”), but their connection is much deeper. Obsolete definitions of these two words lay bare their connected ancestry, allowing for meanings you might not pull out for everyday use but are simultaneously fascinating.

Team building may be essential to your favorite professional team or your corporate success; however, forget modern life for a moment. The Old English word tēam meant “progeny,” “descendants,” “lineage,” or even “a group of draft animals.” Thus, a tēam of ducks or pigs was a standard usage, and we’re not talking about hockey players or sideline mascots.

The related word “teem” derived from the related Old English word tīman or tǣman, which meant “to produce offspring” or “to give birth to.” And, of course, produce enough offspring, and the space will be teeming with them. Hello, modern usage. Is this where rabbits enter the conversation? Forget the ducks and pigs.

As for the chaos, here’s hoping getting our words right will quell at least one modern anxiety. And if that doesn’t help, just think of ducks. Who doesn’t love ducks?

Go team.

Sign-up for my monthly “On Words and Onwards” email newsletter for more language tips and trivia like this.

The post Writing Tip 447: “Team” vs. “Teem” appeared first on Kris Spisak.

Will she flout the rules or flaunt them? Well, maybe it depends on if she’s feeling rebellious or a desire to show off her precision. (Though you’re likely looking only for one of these words)

Let’s talk rebels with an ostentatious cause, because whether we’re talking “flout” or “flaunt,” rebellion and arrogance are likely part of the conversation.

Both “flout” and “flaunt” are verbs we shouldn’t quite aspire to. Both have a negative implication hiding in their natures, and maybe that’s the source of the confusion between them. Maybe it’s the fact that they’ve both been in use since the 1500s. Maybe it’s the fact that they both begin with “fl” and end with “t.”

But here’s what you need to know:

To “flount” is to treat a rule or convention with disdain or to openly disregard it.To “flaunt” is to show off to gain admiration.

Interestingly enough, usage of “flount” seemed to rub off on “flaunt” a hundred years or so ago, because “flaunt” can also have an even more negative definition of showing off for the sake of looking down upon others—a contemptuous addition to the original usage.

With this background, let’s return to our original question, and you’ll likely already know the answer:

Question: Is it “Flouting” or “Flaunting” the Rules?Answer: Flouting the rules, of course.

Now, if we’re talking about a skater girl flaunting the rules? Maybe it’s possible if she’s showing off how perfectly by-the-book she can execute a nollie frontside 360. Maybe she’s flaunting her sick skills on camera for her viewers. So, yes, you could twist this word into possibly being a correct usage, but beyond my stretch of a story, it’s almost never the intended fit for the phrase.

“Flout” was first used as a verb in 1551 and as a noun in 1566, though it’s most commonly a verb today. Records seem to show that “flaunt” also first appeared in 1566.” What a banner year for language and/or language confusion.

Is anything else on your list of confusing word pairs? If so, let me know, and I’ll try to add it to my upcoming posts!

 

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.

The post Writing Tip 446: “Flouting” or “Flaunting” the Rules appeared first on Kris Spisak.

If you’re from the American South, maybe you’ve heard the expression, “As drunk as Cooter Brown.” But who was this guy? And why is it some legends endure?

There are many versions of Cooter Brown’s history, and this is only one. It isn’t quite a recommendation of how to handle political turmoil, but there’s a bigger conversation here all the same.

Do you know this expression?

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more videos and articles like this.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Author, Fiction Editor & Writing Coach | Kris Spisak (@kris.spisak)

The post Language Trivia: “As drunk as Cooter Brown” appeared first on Kris Spisak.

So what do you think? Is this dark alley “sus”? Would you be “sus” if you walked into it? Let’s suss this out.

Oh, spellcheck, “suss” is indeed a word, even though it seems to be flagged often. It’s red-flagged “spelling mistakes” like this that make you seem kind of “sus” yourself actually, spellcheck. See what I did there?

Are you having “sus” vs. “suss” confusion, folks?

New slang often slips into the public vernacular, but in some instances, it mimicks existing words, which adds a degree of confusion when someone tries to write, tweet, or text. So to ensure we’re all on the same page, here’s what you need to know about this duo:

“Suss,” which is nearly always paired with the word “out,” means to investigate or figure (out). For example, “She was trying to suss out the origin of that word.”“Sus,” which is slang or a non-standard usage, comes from an abbreviation of “suspicious.” For example, “I hope no one ever thinks my writing tips are sus.”

Perhaps the reason many spellcheck programs take issue with “suss” is because it in itself is a fairly new word—not as new as the recently popular “sus,” but new by English language measures. Merriam Webster notes that the first known usage of “suss out” was in 1966. Interestingly, both of these words do come from the Latin word suspectare. In the case of “suss,” it derives from the closely related English word “suspect.”

In short, if you’ve been trying to suss out the meaning of “sus” vs. “suss” and how to spell these words, you should be all set. Spellcheck programs might sometimes be suspicious, but let me confirm your suspicions: both are indeed words. You just have to know the difference between them—and perhaps when it may or may not be appropriate to use slang.

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.

The post Writing Tip 445: “Sus” vs. “Suss” appeared first on Kris Spisak.

What holds the record for the most vast encyclopedia ever compiled? Okay, what was the answer before Wikipedia? Today’s writing history trivia has the answer, one older than you might have ever guessed.

Don’t you love learning stories like this? The power of learning via the written word has existed for a long, long time.

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Author, Fiction Editor & Writing Coach | Kris Spisak (@kris.spisak)

The post Writing Trivia: Longest Encyclopedia Ever Written? appeared first on Kris Spisak.

When we think of Hans Christian Andersen, maybe you think of his classic tales, like “The Little Mermaid,” “The Ugly Duckling,” or “The Emperor’s New Clothing,” but Anderson was a storyteller of more than one medium.

I had fun chatting about this on Instagram.

See examples of Hans Christian Andersen’s paper-cut illustrations here.

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more like this.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Author, Fiction Editor & Writing Coach | Kris Spisak (@kris.spisak)

The post Storyteller Trivia: The Varied Tales of Hans Christian Andersen appeared first on Kris Spisak.

Let’s get wild, people … persons … peoples … um … what’s the right word, folks?

Okay, people! (Peoples? Persons?) Have you ever wondered when to use “persons” vs. “people” vs. “peoples”? Yes, all are proper plural forms in English. Let’s leave the singular “person” out of things for a moment. If we’re looking for the correct plural form, what is a writer/speaker to do?

Well, the simplest answer in most cases in the present-day, unless we’re talking legal terminology, is that “people” is usually preferred. One person. Many people. If you’re a native English speaker, I’m guessing you have the same preference; however, modern-day norms aren’t the end of this conversation.

If you were to compare usages of “persons” vs. “people” in the past four hundred years, preferences and recommendations vary widely.



Notice the many shared dips and climbs in popularity, as well as the moments of discord.

Both terms have been around for a long time, but the debate between them has been complicated over the centuries. Are they synonyms? Are they subtly different and thus to be used in different circumstances? Is one of them simply the better word? It depends on when you ask the question.

Matters of etymology begin to break down their possible differences, though.

“People,” an English word in use since the 1200s, shares an etymological origin with the word “population,” both coming from the Latin word populus, meaning the collective idea of “the masses” or “populous.” A collective group. Remember this idea.“Persons,” also in use since the 1200s, shares a root with “persona,” both terms coming from the Latin word persona, meaning a character in a play, a mask worn by an actor, and or an individual person. Notice the individuality that’s at the core of this word.

Do you see what’s happening here?

Some have argued, over the course of centuries, that if we’re talking about a countable, specific group of individuals, one should use “persons,” and contrariwise, if we’re talking about a general mass of people—a crowd? a horde? a throng?—the term “people” is more appropriate. Legal usages in the present day harken back to this distinction. (Lawyers like things organized, countable, and specific, right? Not just guidelines for the multitudes.)

Of course, others have argued it’s a simple matter of right and wrong, that one word is preferable to the other. We all have our opinions. I hear that. (For example, I just used “contrariwise,” which could be argued as an annoying word. Or a cool one. Your pick.)

There’s also the fact that some have argued that “persons” vs. “people” is a class-distinction, with “people” referring to the “promiscuous multitude” (yes, we heard you, George Crabb, in your 1818 publication, English Synonyms Explained). Sigh. The complexities of societal inequalities caught up in a word. We’ll not use that as part of our distinction in our modern conversations.

All this said, we’re starting to get some clarity over the differences between “persons” vs. “people,” even if there’s a good chance you’ll never have to use “persons” in most contexts; however, a question lingers:

Why does “people” (a plural noun) have the plural form “peoples”?

If you remember that “people” is already talking about groups rather than individuals, than this is easy. With “peoples,” we’re talking about a group of groups, specifically different groups that share a commonality. For example, “Indigenous peoples” can refer to a collection of native tribes. “Germanic peoples” refers to the many historical groups of people that spoke forms of Germanic languages.

“Peoples” sounds much more confusing than it actually is.

 

I think this just about wraps it up, as long as you remember not to start tossing apostrophes in there, because you know that apostrophes never create a plural (on resumes, holiday cards, or otherwise).

Got it, peeps? Peeps … Oh, wait … We’ll save that for next time.

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.

The post Writing Tip 444: “Persons” vs. “People” vs. “Peoples” appeared first on Kris Spisak.

Maybe it’s only the editors of the world who look at this image and think of an ellipsis, but that’s what I see. How about you?

Oh, ellipses, the confetti of punctuation marks. A little here, a little there, and it feels a little bit like a celebration, no?

Wait, that’s not what you’re going for?

Sure, I talk about ellipses (the plural form of “ellipsis”) in detail in Get a Grip on Your Grammar (Career Press, 2017; HarperCollins India, 2020), but I wanted to return to the old favorite (ahem, overused) punctuation mark to clear up some confusion.

There’s a lot of debate and inconsistency around ellipses, but let’s just move forward with answers aligned with the Chicago Manual of Style (the standard I always use with my fiction editing clients because it’s largely the standard for traditional book publishers).

Here are some basic ellipsis rules you need to know that I’m frequently asked:

Should there be spaces between the dots of ellipses?

Technically, there should be a space between each dot of the ellipsis, but this causes confusion in formatting for many reasons, not the least of which is in line-breaks, where you don’t want to have your ellipsis broken up onto two lines. Thus, some ignore this space between dots style. Is that you? Are you a rebel?

Here’s the secret, though: Did you know an ellipsis is actually its own punctuation mark? It is a singular character on its own, which only appears to be made of spaced periods. Yes, know it, love it, and copy-and-paste it to keep its spread-out yet cohesive format.

If you type “…” into Microsoft Word, as in three periods in a row, MS Word automatically realigns the spaces between dots for you and utilizes this special character, connecting the three dots so that they will never be split amid a line-break. (A little bit of formatting magic, right?)

Or, here’s another little known trick: If you press “Alt” and “Ctrl” and “.” (the period) at the same time in MS Word, the correct, cohesive yet spaced out ellipsis mark will appear. You can also go to “Insert” then “Symbol” to find the ellipsis character, of course, but either way, once you have the correct ellipsis character, you can use the “Find” and “Replace” function to easily clean this up in your entire document if needed.

(Yes, if you’ve ever taken an editing course with me, in person or online, you know how much I love editing tricks with the “Find” and “Replace” function!)

Should there be spaces before and after an ellipsis?

For the Chicago Manual of Style, there should be a space before and after the ellipsis. Yes, it’s true.

For example: “Talking … more talking.”

The only major exception to this is if you have an ellipsis that ends dialogue, at which time, there should be no space between the end of the ellipsis and the quotation mark.

For example: “Talking, talking, talking …”

 

Do you have more ellipsis questions? If so, let me know, and I can dive deeper for you!

Sign-up for my monthly language tips and trivia email newsletter for more articles like this.

The post Writing Tip 443: Ellipsis Rules You Should Know appeared first on Kris Spisak.

Amid my book talks, book club visits, and signing events around the release of my fiction debut, The Baba Yaga Mask, I’ve had the urge to do more. I’m honored to teach about Ukrainian folk art, folktales, history, and dance as I discuss my book, but I’m also beginning a new effort. Won’t you join me? A Community Challenge

At various book-signings and book talks over the coming months, I will also be holding collections of humanitarian relief supplies to support the millions of Ukrainian women and children displaced by war. All collections will be delivered to Lift Up Ukraine.

Next Collection:Friday, May 6, 2022, 12 – 2 p.m. at The Little Bookshop, Midlothian, VA. 

Reading allows us to empathize with those whose lives are different from our own. Whether picking up a signed copy of The Baba Yaga Mask, another book that calls to you, or simply dropping off supplies, we’d love to see you!

A Book Club Challenge

For book clubs interested in reading The Baba Yaga Mask, I’d be honored to join your meeting to discuss Ukraine, its folk art and history, strong women, and travel fiction with a multi-generational suspense story. And in addition to an author visit, your group can make a difference in the lives of far-off families.

As I’m scheduling visits to central Virginia book clubs in the coming months, I’m not accepting honorariums. Instead, I’m encouraging book club members, friends, and neighbors to bring something small to contribute to our humanitarian aid collection.

Contact me today if your book club might be interested, and if your book club is outside of central Virginia, I’m arranging virtual visits too!

Supplies We’ll Be Collecting

First aid kits  |  Diapers  |  Flashlights  |  Candles

Lightweight Rain ponchos  |  Sleeping bags, sleeping pads, mats for sleeping

Thank you in advance for your support!

Learn more about The Baba Yaga Mask.

Learn more about Kris Spisak.

 

The post Humanitarian Aid for the Ukrainian People appeared first on Kris Spisak.