Penny for Your Thoughts discussion
Your Two Cents
>
Grammar and quality of the written word
date
newest »
newest »
I had no idea you could create topics out of a whim, but nice to see a new face (or post) around here.Proper grammar is essential. That's all I really need to say...
That is precisely the issue... Please define "good grammar". Most can agree on what good basic grammar is, and how it should be applied. However, "good grammar" for fictional writing is different in many cases than "good grammar" for formal writing, which most learn in high school or college english. Considering the fact that various teachers have their own pet peeves, and push style issues as grammatical mistakes (for instance the common "be" verb OCD issue). The question naturally follows what truly is good grammar.
I agree that misspellings should be eliminated. I also agree that such things as proper punctuation should be utilized. I am one hundred percent behind the concept of easy readability concerning sentence structure.
I just have a hard time justifying personal bias by blaming the author. People are claiming grammar, when grammar is often not the issue. They are doing so in a manner as if they were professionals, which is also a falsehood as they are self-proclaimed.
Just as authors can vanity publish, in other words pay for their works to be published so that they can claim to be an author, so self-accredited 'vanity editors' have started to sprout from the woodwork.
They do not even know the correct meaning of vanity publishing, nor do they tend to use proper grammar in their feedback attacks. If they do not personally use proper grammar, what makes them think they are suitable to judge another's grammar?
You have to admit it is a fair question, unless you buy into the modernistic notion that the customer is right, even when they are obviously wrong.
I think that writing style has a strong influence on "good" grammar in regards to the specific story. What I personally have a problem with on the Internet is the lack of basic grammar skills that make understanding one another an issue. As a writer, I tend to experiment with grammar and structure in a story, ignoring some rules and emphasizing othesr. What I find to be the most important is remaining consistent with whatever style is put forth. That's the main problem I had with reading the Handmaid's Tale. From misused semicolons and comma splices, there was literally no consistency in the style. Even the past-tense-no-quotation-marks-present-tense-quotation-marks broke towards the end.
English teachers like to get it into kids' heads that some words are bad and to use more descriptive words. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, the words they give are often just fine (i.e. said). One of my creative writing teachers has a list of red flag words, but they're the over used "crimson tears" or "black soul" and whatever that are over used and don't carry as much meaning. I understand those, because they don't show anything other than pretentiousness. I don't understand why "said" is so bad. But this is beside the point.
On the idea of self-publishing: it's more so the typos and plot holes and under developed/cliche characters that frustrate me. Like, editors exist for a reason and they're not too hard to come by. First drafts are never the best draft.
On the note of editors: Don't you think the editor for the Warriors series is getting lazy? I mean, first there was the typo that got me my user name, then the over-abundance of the word "retorted" and finally, a whole copy of a chapter literally copied and pasted after that chapter that it was copied from! I mean, I though editors were supposed to fix errors in the books.... Hence the given name? Or maybe it's just my copy of the book....What does "Cary" mean?
I think that the main reason that we see so many errors in grammar and spelling (especially online) is due to laziness and not the lack of knowledge. It's getting pretty annoying, and it's even more annoying when you're RPing and then the post that replies is a jumble of letters that are supposed to form a sentence. Ugh.
Sorry. I typed that on my phone during and didn't actually check to make sure that everything was right. I meant carry, not Cary.
Shattered Storms wrote: "On the note of editors: Don't you think the editor for the Warriors series is getting lazy? I mean, first there was the typo that got me my user name, then the over-abundance of the word "retorted"..."I think that once a series or an author gets really successful, they and/or their editors get lazy and assume that people will just buy it. I don't read the series anymore because it's gotten so campy and unrealistic (in relation to their world). Like, I get that it's a children's series, but writing a book series pandering to a certain audience, I think, is no way to write.
I would blame lack of knowledge complied with laziness. I wasn't formally taught how to use a semicolon or dashes and had to learn myself when I was in eighth grade. Also, the difference between things like affect and effect.
Unrealistic...? Oh, right. Like when they moved the four Clans to the lake? I mean, who would not notice so many cats wandering among the mountains? There are people that climb mountains in their spare time, but I guess I'm just thinking too much. And I think Lionblaze's powers are really just overkill! I mean, not able to get hurt during battle? That's pushing it a little too far in my book.
I had to look that "Affect" and "Effect" thing up. >.< I got confused myself. So, basically, one is considered to be a "result" and the other to be an "influence". I need to memorize this. If it pops up in the exams... (not likely here, but still likely) I'm gonna be screwed.
Paul wrote: "That is precisely the issue... Please define "good grammar". Most can agree on what good basic grammar is, and how it should be applied. However, "good grammar" for fictional writing is different in many cases than "good grammar" for formal writing, which most learn in high school or college english...""Good grammar" reflects a working knowledge of the currently agreed upon rules for written English. As a self-described "grammar Nazi," I find incorrect punctuation, mistaken homophones, etc. to be terribly distracting and feel it is every writer's responsibility to acquire a good grasp of the rules. Whether writing fiction, nonfiction, or technical pieces (all of which have stylistic differences), the same grammatical rules apply.
I just started what I hope to be an ongoing series of blog posts titled "Advice From the Dreaded Grammar Nazi," the first of which you can find here: http://www.goodreads.com/author_blog_.... Far too many people (including authors and self-proclaimed "editors") don't even know how to apply proper punctuation. Moreover, a good number of these people have no idea their punctuation is as bad as it is and do nothing but perpetuate the problem.
Case in point. You find... you feel... and this is the problem. Those are subjective statements made towards an inherently neutral subject. 'Proper grammar' is as defined as a whole, and many rules of grammar are objective. The simple comma may be used in many ways, all of them 'proper grammar', yet subjectively one person may like one particular usage over another.
Basic spelling is a must, I agree, yet numerous words which are 'legal' to use are found in no dictionary. Many words are subjectively dissallowed due to personal bias, such as the common 'be verb' bias. Other proper usages are often bombasted as well, such as contractions, etc,.
Therefore, exactly what supposedly IS 'proper grammar', especially considering that these biases determine which grammatical usages are allowed in a particular writing genre?
(P.S. Yes, there are differences of grammatical usages allowed in different types of writing.)
I also reiterate again that it is both the job and duty of every author to know and utilise the basic grammatical rules in their writing. It seems that others tend to forget that I have stated this previously.
In no uncertain terms, I am talking about self-styled experts quoting personal bias which they have rebranded and relabeled as 'grammar'.
Some informative reading for the grammar nazis... The article was written by an English professor, you know, a REAL expert...http://news.yahoo.com/7-bogus-grammar...
Cut and paste it into the browser address bar if it does not form a link.
The "I could care less" statement at the end is something I will definitely disagree on. "I could care less" means that I could care less, that I have the capacity to care less, and that therefore I still care, which is clearly not the same thing as "I couldn't care less," which means that I have no capability to care at all. The former says that I do care, while the latter says that I don't, so the two shouldn't be interchangeable.
Yeah. It's weird, as could and couldn't have the opposite meanings and yet the guy writing it basically said that it was similar. I guess it's a matter of perspective.
This is a useful page to bring up, thanks.:D
Grammatical errors are the 'snafus' we authors constantly try to avoid, as they make reading our work difficult or clumsy.
Grammar concerns spelling,punctuational usage, and sentence structure.
Style is the manner in which the author chooses to engage their audiences, and includes such things as diction, prose, syntactical structure, cliches, sentence form (balanced, unbalanced, loose, etc.), among many other things. Proper writing 'style' is subjective, and what constitutes good style varies from reader to reader, or even from teacher to teacher.
Grammar usage is different among many different forms of writing, to complicate matters. Basic grammar tends to apply, but the grammatical rules change somewhat between formal writing, fictional writing, and business writing.
For instance, a sentence fragment is condemned grammatically in either formal or business writing, but is acceptable within quotes as character speech in fictional writing. "You can't!" or "Why should I?" are good examples which are plausible for a character to say in a story, yet both are sentence fragments. However, to use the simple statement without quotes in formal writing breaks writing rules of both grammar and style.
I have noticed a trend of authors and readers which have delegated themselves as 'purists of the written word', which are often defined colloquially as either "Grammar Nazi" or "The Grammar Police". What I find disturbing is that they tend to use lousy grammar in their written attacks on the offending authors, demonstrating their own expertise... or lack thereof.
I also find it extremely disturbing that they demonstrate extreme bias towards independently published authors, and ignore traditionally published authors which tend to utilize equally bad style, and whose works also are questionable at best concerning grammar.
What needs to be addressed and understood by all, authors and readers alike, is that basic grammar is a must, in order to promote an enjoyable reading experience. However, extended grammatical application useful for formal writing is inadequate and unwieldy for fictional use, and can turn an otherwise exciting or intriguing story into a bland, emotionless mess.
On the other side of the coin there also exists those authors, both traditional and nontraditional of publication, which think that their rough draft qualifies as a finished work ready for publication. This is not acceptable either in the scheme of things, as authors tend to be lumped together. ("Man, even my DOG can spell better than this... Look what passes for writing these days!")
By the way, use of emphasis of any type is author dependent, even considering the use of all caps as I did above. It is a style and not a grammar issue, unless used nonsensically. I actually used that intentionally so that you could see a practical example. Many people think that the use of all caps is a grammatical snafu, when it is not an issue of grammar at all.
What are your thoughts on the matter?