Never paid attention to the Grammar lessons in English class.

[rosewood]

I'm trying to write my first novel, but I have to say that my grammar sucks! (Maybe you can tell this, just from my post.) I've been using a grammar handbook to try and correct my mistakes. This helps, but can anyone suggest a website or even classes that I could take that would be more helpful?

In addition, how important is it to have all your grammar correct when you first send out your work?

[Medievalist]

I'm trying to write my first novel, but I have to say that my grammar sucks!?

First, just write; you can revise later. Don't let grammar anxiety stop you from progressing.

Take a composition class, not a novel class, but a basic composition or expository writing class at your local community college. I'm fond of Diana Hacker's A Writer's Reference as a grammar and writing handbook; it's about 45.00 new, but go to a college book store and get a used copy for ten bucks or so. Or get any number of other grammar/usage handbooks designed for undergraduate English classes; they tend to be understandable, practical, and not as boring as most.

[Jamesaritchie]

I'm trying to write my first novel, but I have to say that my grammar sucks! (Maybe you can tell this, just from my post.) I've been using a grammar handbook to try and correct my mistakes. This helps, but can anyone suggest a website or even classes that I could take that would be more helpful?

In addition, how important is it to have all your grammar correct when you first send out your work?

You post doesn't reveal any horrible lack of grammar. When you first send out your work, it's very important to have the grammar pretty well done, if not absolutely perfect. We all make mistakes, but many editors are seriously unforgiving about too many, too soon.

You don't have to perfect where grammar and punctuation are concerned, you just have to be, as UJ says, competent. You have to know and use the basics.

I was in your situation when I started writing, and I learned enough in thirty days of study to sell what I wrote. I used a seventh grade grammar book, and I still believe this is far and away the best way to learn grammar. A seventh or eigth grade grammar book, depending on what the school uses, contains all a fiction writer really needs to know, and won't overwhelm you with more advanced grammar you will rarely, if ever, use.

Combine this with Strunk & White's Rhe Elements of Style, and you have a boatload of answers.

As for websites, one of my favorites is http://cctc.commnet.edu/grammar/

I also like OWL, particularly this page: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/esl/eslstudent.html

[KTC]

Here's a free link to one of my standbys....

http://www.bartleby.com/141/

Elements of Style...never open MS Word without it!

Just click on all the chapter headings to read the pages in that chapter. The whole book is here. It's become public domain.

[Azure Skye]

Why does this always happen to me? I was going to make a post about grammar and here we are. :::cue Twilight Zone music:::

Anyway, I just picked up, once again, an old 9th grade grammar book I bought somewhere for about 25 cents. I'm starting at the beginning. I know grammar but I'm not sure how well I know it. I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only novice writer who feels that way.

My dad was a Karate instructor and his philosophy of teaching and learning karate was to know the basics and keep learning and relearning them ad nauseam...solid foundation and all that. I also had a violin teacher who taught me the same philosophy -- "You can't play it fast if you don't know it slow." I love the kids grammar workbooks and often go into a store called Holcombs (I think) and pick up a few books every now and then. So, I study the basics quite often.

Sorry for the ramble.:Coffee:

http://www.holcombs.com/

[Medievalist]

Here's a free link to one of my standbys....

http://www.bartleby.com/141/

Elements of Style...never open MS Word without it!

Just click on all the chapter headings to read the pages in that chapter. The whole book is here. It's become public domain.

No, it hasn't become public domain.

Bartleby licensed that specific edition; they've paid for it. I know it seems like a minor thing, but really, it isn't.

And, as I keep saying, while Strunk and White is very useful, it's a style guide, not a grammar text.

[CaoPaux]

http://cctc.commnet.edu/grammar/ :Lecture:

[reph]

Here's another site, grammarmudge (The Grammar Curmudgeon):

http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.com/Home.html

It has discussion boards where you can ask questions.

[Trapped in amber]

I have appalling problems with grammar and spelling, I'm always trying to improve both. I've found Strunk and White very helpful, and Eats, Shoots and Leaves by Lynne Truss has really improved my punctuation. A class sounds like a very good idea.

You're not alone.

I do think these things are very important in writing, and you can improve, but don't let it discourage you from working on your novel.

[KTC]

No, it hasn't become public domain.

Bartleby licensed that specific edition; they've paid for it. I know it seems like a minor thing, but really, it isn't.

And, as I keep saying, while Strunk and White is very useful, it's a style guide, not a grammar text.


Okay...first off, I was told by a friend that it was public domain...that the copyright ran out and it was now nobody's possession. I will have to tell this friend he is wrong. I'm sure he is mistaken.

And, secondly, I know, I know...it's a style guide. But I find some helpful grammar hints within it.

Thanks for the heads up on the misinformation. I can't wait to tell Mr. Knowitall that he was wrong!

[Jamesaritchie]

No, it hasn't become public domain.

Bartleby licensed that specific edition; they've paid for it. I know it seems like a minor thing, but really, it isn't.

And, as I keep saying, while Strunk and White is very useful, it's a style guide, not a grammar text.

Well, even though it's a style guide, I also think Strunk & White is also the best grammar guide around by a wide margin. I haven't found any that match it for style, or for common, everyday grammar of the sort fiction writers need.

As for the Bartleby edition, it is and isn't in public domain. It isn't Strunk & White's Elements of Style at all, just Strunk's, and it was published in 1918, which puts it in pubic domain.

What's not in public domain is how Bartleby put it on their website. The specific layout of the book on Bartleby is copyrighted, but the book itself is in public domain. Anything written before 1927 is.

But the version on Bartleby is nearly useless. It's not only horrendously outdated, what makes Strunk & White so useful and so good, both as a style and a grammar guide, is the input from E. B. White, one of the best stylists and grammarians who ever lived.

It's Strunk & White's that's called "the writer's Bible," not the old Strunk edition.

[KTC]

I have the newer edition in paperback, myself. I don't use an online version. I just found it for Rose's use. Oops...didn't even notice it was not the same. Rose, go buy the paperback which includes White. It sells really cheap and it is a tool I am never without.

[James D. Macdonald]

Your local bookstore will have workbooks designed for high school students. You might also check the test-prep workbooks for the PSAT.

Reading -- a lot -- will also help.

[jackie106]

I'm fond of Diana Hacker's A Writer's Reference as a grammar and writing handbook; it's about 45.00 new, but go to a college book store and get a used copy for ten bucks or so.

If you want to work online, you can do grammar exercises (http://www.dianahacker.com/pocket/gm_menu.asp) on Diana Hacker's web site (www.dianahacker.com (http://www.dianahacker.com)).

You probably know more about grammar than you think you do. A lot of it is intuitive.

Jackie

[Medievalist]

You probably know more about grammar than you think you do. A lot of it is intuitive.
Jackie

I'd disagree with you there; I probably know a lot less than I think I do. I keep finding more things to look into. And I take my hat off and bow to anyone who thinks English is intuitive; I find it maddening and charming by turns.

[JanaLanier]

And I take my hat off and bow to anyone who thinks English is intuitive; I find it maddening and charming by turns.

Medievalist, I respect your ability to take apart a sentence, and label phrases and participles and predicates, oh my!

But as a writer, do I really need the ability to label the parts of a sentence I write? I read a lot, and have a "feel" for correct grammar. But apart from Strunk and White, I haven't "studied" grammar and I get confused by a lot of the technical terms. My feeling (my naive hope?) is that I can recognize a clunky sentence and fix it without knowing the technical reason that made it clunky. Is this delusional?

[maestrowork]

Jana, my thought exactly. I can't name and dissect a sentence if my life depends on it, but I sure can recognize it when a sentence seems wrong, or it can be better, etc. As a writer, I just have an instinctive ability to use the language without being able name all the parts. I know the basic grammar, but don't ask me what a participial adjective is. ;) And I consider myself a pretty good critter or editor...

[KTC]

If I ever start to dissect a sentence here...if you ever see me doing so...please tell me I have no business writing! I prefer the music of words to the taking apart of sentences. YUCH!

[Medievalist]

But as a writer, do I really need the ability to label the parts of a sentence I write? I read a lot, and have a "feel" for correct grammar. But apart from Strunk and White, I haven't "studied" grammar and I get confused by a lot of the technical terms. My feeling (my naive hope?) is that I can recognize a clunky sentence and fix it without knowing the technical reason that made it clunky. Is this delusional?

No the names aren't that important; but sometimes the names make it easier to talk about stuff. I have to look up the names all the time, because grammar is really a way of describing the way the language works, and there are different "dialects," so to speak, all of which describe the same blessed thing, but using different words.

When I'm teaching, people laugh because I usually forget to use the names (other than the basic word catergories like nouns and verbs) and I talk about them like they're characters in a play or novel:

"See, then this little guy, over here, he forces the rest of the sentence to . . ."

[Jamesaritchie]

Medievalist, I respect your ability to take apart a sentence, and label phrases and participles and predicates, oh my!

But as a writer, do I really need the ability to label the parts of a sentence I write? I read a lot, and have a "feel" for correct grammar. But apart from Strunk and White, I haven't "studied" grammar and I get confused by a lot of the technical terms. My feeling (my naive hope?) is that I can recognize a clunky sentence and fix it without knowing the technical reason that made it clunky. Is this delusional?

One of the reasons I love Strunk & White so much is that it conmtains all the average fiction writer will ever need to know, but leaves out many of the complications that simply make grammar a pain in the rear for many new writers.

I believe anyone who reads enough will soon get a feel for what is and isn't a good sentence. The technical terms can make it easier to learn the complications of grammar, but they're in no way necessary to write great fiction. In other words, I do not believe grammar is intuitive, but I do believe writing well can be.

Having an ear for language is more important than having a technical kbnowledge of grammar. Even if you have no idea what a preposition is, odds are you know sometimes ending a sentence with one is the only wise choice, regardless of the rule. Reading quickly teaches that jumping through hoops to follow a rule is not a good idea. When challenged about ending a sentence with a preposition, Chruchill supposed said, "This is the sort of errant pedantry up with which I will not put." I can't imagine a better reply.

My own belief is that a writer who understands where to put a comma, and who knows the difference between active and passive voice, probably knows just about everything they need to know to write as well as anyone. Writers who use commas correctly seldom make serious mistakes in any area of writing.

Once these two things are learned, once you know where a comma does and doesn't go, once you can recognize active and passive voice, the rest becomes a matter of the ear. A sentence can be grammatically perfect, and still read like crap. Or bore the bejeebers out of anyone. And a sentence can break several rules, can slaughter the rules of grammar, and read beautifully.

I majored in English and in Journalism, and the first thing our journalism prof told us was to forget everything we learned in English class. He didn't mean this literally, of course, but by and large, he was absolutely correct.

I believe any writer should know the basics of grammar, primarily the use of the comma and active voice, but as our journalism prof said, "Grammar is grammar, writing is writing, and when the two conflict, writing should always win."

Reading a lot of fiction teaches most writers what is and isn't a good sentence, even if they have no clue about the rules of grammar, or the technical terms, that can be used to diagram the sentence.

Learn the bare basics, keep a thin, handy guide nearby, read as much good writing as possible, and if you have the ear a writer needs, you'll be fine.

[zeprosnepsid]

My grammar is really terrible and as much as I might try to learn it, it never sticks.

Fortunately, my boyfriend's grammar is outstanding and he's always correcting me on things I didn't know were mistakes. So I find reference grammar books useless, I can't look something up if I don't know what it is. I don't even know it's wrong. I've never tried looking at a textbook, but I think that might be more helpful.

As for whether or not you need grammar, it depends. Someone could make a good movie without good filmmaking (For instance, Pulp Fiction messes up continuity all the time and breaks the biggest rule in filmmaking -- the 180 rule), but if you understand all the rules and tenets of filmmaking, you can bend them to your will. If you understand the 180 rule and then break it on purpose, not out of ignorance, you create a desired effect to give your film more meaning.

The same is true of writing. Grammar is something you can have in your bag of tricks, and the more stuff you have in your bag, the better you're off. The more things you can do as a writer.

So you can get by on active verbs and commas, but you're limiting yourself and what you're able to accomplish.

I think when people say grammar is 'intuitive', they mean they've picked it up from reading. I've noticed both my grammar and vocabulary improving upon reading. But a lot of mainstream books these days are published without great grammar, so you might have to read classic and well written books to be gaining the right kind of intuition.

[SeanDSchaffer]

Jana, my thought exactly. I can't name and dissect a sentence if my life depends on it, but I sure can recognize it when a sentence seems wrong, or it can be better, etc. As a writer, I just have an instinctive ability to use the language without being able name all the parts. I know the basic grammar, but don't ask me what a participial adjective is. ;) And I consider myself a pretty good critter or editor...


This isn't exactly a bad thing in my opinion, either. I have a friend who used to tell me he has so much head-knowledge into cars that he could write an encyclopedia just on cars. Yet he also told me that if his life depended upon it, he could not so much as change the spark plugs in the cars he knew so much about.

On the same token, my step-dad doesn't know all the fancy terms dealing with automobiles and every little technical term in the world, but describe to him something unusual about your car, and he'll almost invariably tell you exactly what's wrong with it.

What I'm saying is that there is head-knowledge; and there is what I call heart-knowledge. Head-knowledge is knowing up in your mind how everything works, and all the technicalities, etc. But heart-knowledge is the application of what you know. A lot of people who might not have the head-knowledge so far as writing's technicalities go, can still have the heart-knowledge that allows them to tell when a sentence 'works' and when a sentence doesn't 'work.' I personally subscribe to the idea that if a writer knows inside what works, that rather supercedes what their learning or lack thereof might tell them they're capable of doing.

;)

[JanaLanier]

A lot of people who might not have the head-knowledge so far as writing's technicalities go, can still have the heart-knowledge that allows them to tell when a sentence 'works' and when a sentence doesn't 'work.' I personally subscribe to the idea that if a writer knows inside what works, that rather supercedes what their learning or lack thereof might tell them they're capable of doing.

;)

Very interesting.

D'ya think you can 'unlearn' heart-knowledge by over-analyzing your own work? I mean that in the sense that sometimes you have to trust what you write (although as a newbie, that trust might be a mask for delusion).

[MacAllister]

I moved Tayven's post to SYW--left a redirect, here in novels. Thanks.

[Vomaxx]

I majored in English and in Journalism, and the first thing our journalism prof told us was to forget everything we learned in English class.

Interesting but not surprising. We don't have to wonder why journalism is considered the lowest form of literature!

[Medievalist]

I think, somewhat paradoxically, that writers who worry about "grammar" are more often the ones who needn't worry and should just write the words as they hear them. You can always go back and revise.

That said, don't rely on the idea that "it's the editor's job to 'fix' my grammar," because it's not. It's the editors' job to watch out for stuff a writer might have missed, or not known about, not to clean up after you.

So. Write. Rest. Revise.

[reph]

D'ya think you can 'unlearn' heart-knowledge by over-analyzing your own work?
I don't think so, although you can work yourself into a state of immobility by obsessing over whether each sentence is perfect. Evidently the word "grammar" scares people. It makes them think of being hit with a ruler. The grammar of a language is just a set of statements that describe how to form sentences in that language.

[Medievalist]

Evidently the word "grammar" scares people. It makes them think of being hit with a ruler. The grammar of a language is just a set of statements that describe how to form sentences in that language.

Somewhere on this board is a thread revolving around grammar wherein I was driven almost to madness (not that anyone'd notice a change, mind you) by people misunderstanding, and misusing "grammar."

Grammar describes how a language works, at a particular historic period (which may be now). Grammar itself isn't a reflection of "good" or "bad," but one of reality. We should, perhaps, think of effective grammar and non-effective grammar, or functional and non-functional.

[JanaLanier]

Evidently the word "grammar" scares people. It makes them think of being hit with a ruler.

:roll:

So true! If someone asked me to diagram a sentence, I'd probably cry!

[SeanDSchaffer]

Very interesting.

D'ya think you can 'unlearn' heart-knowledge by over-analyzing your own work? I mean that in the sense that sometimes you have to trust what you write (although as a newbie, that trust might be a mask for delusion).


You might be able to ruin a work by over-analyzing it, IMO, but 'unlearn' the heart-knowledge? I'd have to agree with Reph on that in saying I honestly don't think so. If it's ingrained into you, it's very difficult to get it out of your system entirely. Kind of like what people say about riding a bicycle: once you know how to do it, you pretty much have that inside of you for the rest of your life.

As for the 'mask of delusion' you mentioned, Jana; I'd have to agree with you to some extent on that. I know I have a tendency to be over-confident in my own abilities, which in effect can ruin even the best of novels.

This is what makes writing communities such as AW and others like it so good for the individual writer. They give a place to show off your works and have others critique it so you can make your works better. There's an old proverb that goes 'As iron sharpens iron, so does a friend the countenance of his friend.' That's the beauty of the writer's group. It's where writers can 'sharpen' the writing skill of their colleagues; and at the same time, their own skills can in the process be sharpened by their fellows' critiques.

I personally think that if someone trusts too much in their own abilities, then yes, they are masking themselves with delusion.

[Lilybiz]

Grammar describes how a language works, at a particular historic period (which may be now). Grammar itself isn't a reflection of "good" or "bad," but one of reality. We should, perhaps, think of effective grammar and non-effective grammar, or functional and non-functional.

Good point, Medievalist.

I majored in Rhetoric, believe it or not, and yet I'm one of the many who knows grammar more intuitively than by the book. I thought I knew everything until I read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves," and was (pleasantly) surprised to find I still have plenty to learn.

Grammar at its best or, to quote Medievalist, at its most "effective," simply serves to tell the reader what the writer means. A misplaced comma can misplace your intent and give the wrong message. Conversely, using grammar "incorrectly" can enhance your meaning or create a character's voice or convey emotion. But you have to understand how grammar works to know how to use it "incorrectly" to good effect.

Though I'm the first to say I'm a stickler for effective (notice I don't say "correct") grammar in a published work, I don't think people should sweat it in the early drafts. Once you're submitting, though, it's time to make sure you have it right. There's so much competition out there. If your grammar is bad enough that your meaning's not coming across, your manuscript might not make it past the first reader.

[reph]

I thought I knew everything until I read "Eats, Shoots & Leaves," and was (pleasantly) surprised to find I still have plenty to learn.
It might not be you. I haven't read "E, S&L," but I've read that it has many mistakes, including punctuation mistakes.

[Lilybiz]

It might not be you. I haven't read "E, S&L," but I've read that it has many mistakes, including punctuation mistakes.

Hmmm. Possible, I suppose. I haven't heard that. The author's a Brit and it could be that whatever you read about it referred to the language barrier. It could also be that there were errors and I just don't know enough to point them out.

Read it. Let me know what you think. I thought it was a hoot, and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

[three seven]

I honestly can't even remember what an adverb is, and I'm pretty sure I don't know the difference between passive voice and - what was the other one? - but people keep telling me they like what I write, so I really don't give a monkey's.

:Shrug:

[Jamesaritchie]

I honestly can't even remember what an adverb is, and I'm pretty sure I don't know the difference between passive voice and - what was the other one? - but people keep telling me they like what I write, so I really don't give a monkey's.

:Shrug:

As long as editors are happy with it, you're fine.

[Richard White]

I honestly can't even remember what an adverb is, and I'm pretty sure I don't know the difference between passive voice and - what was the other one? - but people keep telling me they like what I write, so I really don't give a monkey's.

:Shrug:

The sad part is, I read the first line of your message and the song from "Grammar Rock" started running through my head.

"Lolly, lolly, lolly, get your adverbs here!"

I remember taking an English test in the Army for "instructors". At various times throughout the test, the soft whistling of "Conjunction Junction" could be heard as people tried to remember stuff. The instructor said afterwards, that was a common occurance.

I guess Schoolhouse Rock was more effective than I thought.

[rosewood]

Thank you for your comments. They are helpful. I have one other question related to grammar. Even though I am going to "study-up" on my grammar, I have heard of businesses that can help you edit your work. Is this another avenue that a writer could take if they are not completely comfortable with their grammar skills?

[Medievalist]

Thank you for your comments. They are helpful. I have one other question related to grammar. Even though I am going to "study-up" on my grammar, I have heard of businesses that can help you edit your work. Is this another avenue that a writer could take if they are not completely comfortable with their grammar skills?

Yeah, but it's fraught with potential scams, and other problems. If you go that route, be cautious. It could be very good, or be very expensive and unpleasant.

I'm quite happy editing non-fiction technical books, or academic / scholarly stuff, but I know that's not the same as fiction. You want an experienced professional even to "just look at the grammar." You can't really isolate grammar like that; it's all intertwingled.

Based on your posts, I don't see any particular problems in your grammar.

[Lilybiz]

Rosewood, I agree with Medievalist that your grammar looks fine in your posts. Could you be worrying too much? Don't let it keep you from writing. You might want to try writing something without worrying about grammar, then show it to a friend who's a grammar whiz and get their opinion. Or post something here in the "Show Your Work" thread and ask specifically for feedback on grammar.

Maybe all you need is confidence.

[Jamesaritchie]

Thank you for your comments. They are helpful. I have one other question related to grammar. Even though I am going to "study-up" on my grammar, I have heard of businesses that can help you edit your work. Is this another avenue that a writer could take if they are not completely comfortable with their grammar skills?

I'd avoid places such as this. Writing and grammar really are intertwined, and making your writing say what you want is largely grammar dependent. It's fine to have someone read through your work with an eye toward correcting minor goofs, but if you really need paid help I think you're in trouble.

I don't believe a writer needs to know all the technical terms for various aspects of grammar, but a writer does have to know what is correct and what isn't, or hiring someone simply isn't going to do much good.

What I believe is this: if you know the difference between active and passive voice, if you know how to use commas well, and if you read enough, odds are you'll write sentences editors won;t have to spend much time correcting. Odds are also that you'll be saying whatever it is you want to say in the best way you can. I don;t believe you can hire this part of writing. Better to hire someone to teach you grammar and punctuation.

Grammar is largely cultural, but it's much more than this. Grammar and punctuation are also the product of time and experience. Many, maybe most, changes in grammar and punctuation are refinements brought about by centuries of trial and error. Over the centuries, writers write, editors edit, and the reading public gives feedback. This is how we learn what works and what doesn't, what makes writing say what you wish it to say and what doesn't, and what lets us understand the best way to communicate through writing.

I don't believe it matters much how you get it right. I don't believe it matters how many technical terms you know. I do know you have to get it pretty much right or editors simply aren't going to buy your work, and on the whole, readers aren't going to read it with any pleasure.

[CaoPaux]

Y'all might get a kick out of this: The Grammar Snob Test (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=14931853145952384900)

I'm "Laid Back", scoring 56 snob points out of 100, higher than 16% of my demographic.

:D

[LightShadow]

Buy the book "Woe is I" by Patricia T. O'Conner. After forgetting so much English, she will get you back into the swing of things, but it is written in a way that you enjoy reading it, and have fun spraying WD40 on those rusty givots in your brain.

www.geocities.com/douglasvgibbs

[B.L. Robinson]

I have pre-readers that go over my manuscripts, and I have been told by one that I overuse the words "that" and "had". I think that in many cases it boils down to a writer's "style" and voice in their work. I know that there are many instances where a rule is ironclad, but I try in my own work to make it just a bit "unique", and if bending the rules a bit does it, then that is fine with me! :scared:

Bruce

[three seven]

Y'all might get a kick out of this: The Grammar Snob Test (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=14931853145952384900)

I'm "Laid Back", scoring 56 snob points out of 100, higher than 16% of my demographic.Huh. I have 67 snob points, higher than 83% of my kind.

Although I'm not sure how accurate that is, since there are numerous spelling mistakes in otherwise grammatically-acceptable phrases, and that will obviously have swung my score a little... ;)

[maestrowork]

I'm "laid back" with 51 snob points, better than 31% of my demographics (I'm an older guy, mind you).

[LightShadow]

I'm "laid back" with 51 snob points, better than 31% of my demographics (I'm an older guy, mind you).older guy? that's a matter of perception. Some people say I'm an older guy, others say I'm young, so I tell people I am what I am.

[Medievalist]

Dude, I'm 69! I forgot to save the ranking comment.

[LightShadow]

Dude, I'm 69! I forgot to save the ranking comment.Congrats, you are entitled to my respect and honor (that was not sarcastic, either). But you're still young. My grandfather died at 87, and he was still young at heart. My great grandfather was 103, and died on his feet. It's all relative, is the point. Age of the shell that we inhabit does not matter. What matters is how we apply what we have learned over the years.

[LightShadow]

I have pre-readers that go over my manuscripts, and I have been told by one that I overuse the words "that" and "had". I think that in many cases it boils down to a writer's "style" and voice in their work. I know that there are many instances where a rule is ironclad, but I try in my own work to make it just a bit "unique", and if bending the rules a bit does it, then that is fine with me! :scared:

Bruceif the sentence can stand without that and had, the word's unneccessary and needs to be omitted. Unneccessary words and needless dialogue attribution, I think, slows a story down.

[B.L. Robinson]

You have a mighty respect for the English language, and its tortuous misuse by the uneducated burns your soul. You can barely restrain yourself from grammatical vigilantism. You often find your friends pre-emptively apologizing for their language goofs, fearing your wrath, or at least merciless teasing.


My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender: http://is0.okcupid.com/graphics/0.gif (http://www.okcupid.com/)http://is0.okcupid.com/graphics/0.gif (http://www.okcupid.com/)You scored higher than 99% on snobbery

:crazy:

[LightShadow]

I'm confused. Was that aimed at me? Oh, and yes, I am constantly guilty of correcting other people's English to the point that sometimes they tell me to "shut up already!"

[Sarita]

Y'all might get a kick out of this: The Grammar Snob Test (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=14931853145952384900)

I'm "Laid Back", scoring 56 snob points out of 100, higher than 16% of my demographic.

Laid Back 61 snob points (out of 100), higher than 71% of my demographic. Hmmm... not sure about this.

[LightShadow]

I'm missing something. Maybe it's 'cuz I'm relatively new, sort of, to this forum. What in the *!$&$#@ is snob points?

[Sarita]

Hey Lightshadow: The link is here:

http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=14931853145952384900

Take the test and tell us how many points you score and how that compares with your demographic. It will give you the results at the end. :Thumbs:

[LightShadow]

Okay, I took the test. It says I have 74 snob pts, and 76%. Is that bad?

[Maryn]

My results don't really coalesce. I got Laid Back, with 51 snob points, but higher than 99% of my peers. There was something about how I kept my complaints to myself--which pretty much invalidates the results right there!

Maryn, constant complainer

[jules]

OK, so what _is_ a Harvard Comma?

[LightShadow]

OK, so what _is_ a Harvard Comma?it's a serial comma, before "and" and its usage depends on various styles. Often it's not necessary, unless needed to avoid confusion.

[firehorse]

Obsessive-Compulsive
87 snob points (out of 100)
You need to get a life. Proper language use is a fine hobby, but not at the expensive of relationships, leisure activities, careers and the like. Really, go see a therapist and get evaluated for OCD. In the meantime, here's a valium...

:roll:

92nd percentile. Apparently there are quite a few grammatically correct women in their late 30s out there.

(Okay, the typo in the summation is bugging me ["expensive"], but if I send the test creator an e-mail, I'll only be proving her point.)

[LightShadow]

Obsessive-Compulsive
87 snob points (out of 100)
You need to get a life. Proper language use is a fine hobby, but not at the expensive of relationships, leisure activities, careers and the like. Really, go see a therapist and get evaluated for OCD. In the meantime, here's a valium...

:roll:

92nd percentile. Apparently there are quite a few grammatically correct women in their late 30s out there.

(Okay, the typo in the summation is bugging me ["expensive"], but if I send the test creator an e-mail, I'll only be proving her point.)Wow, now I don't feel so snobbish with my 74 pts, and 76%!

[firehorse]

The variance in scores is probably due to age differences. The site was designed by Harvard grads (I know 'cuz they were my nephew's roommates). So I'd expect a more difficult curve among males 18-27 - the age the creators and their classmates are now - than among any other demographic.

LightShadow - I consciously avoid correcting other people's grammar, yet I'm still told I'm a grammar freak! To be fair (and a bit paranoid), I often notice friends correcting themselves around me. I'm like the grammatical equivalent of the nun that makes you stand up straighter out of fear. I often use incorrect grammar in conversation, in an attempt to blend in and make others more comfortable; at first, I found it artificial and uncomfortable, but now it's second nature. In addition, unless I'm speaking with professors, I begin to feel as though I'm in a Merchant-Ivory character out of place in a Kevin Smith film when using proper English conversationally :D.

My theory (and the way I was taught) is: learn the rules, follow them most of the time, but break them deliberately at choice moments, in order to create specific voices, evoke emotional responses, etc.

[Medievalist]

Serial, Oxford, or Harvard Comma

The serial comma is the comma inserted before "and" in a series of items. This sentence does not use the serial comma:

He had eggs, bacon and sausage for breakfast.

It isn't clear that the bacon and sausage are two items; they might be interpreted as a new form of breakfast dish. In this sentence:

He had eggs, bacon, and sausage for breakfast.

the serial comma is inserted before the and, clearly separating the bacon and sausage. You might think that's not such a big deal, but consider this archetypal example:

Book Dedication: To my parents, Ayn Rand and God

In general, I use the comma if it makes sense, and it usually does, to me. Howsomever, should you have an editor who feels otherwise, then do not argue with your editor. If your editor sees the serial comma as a sign of literacy and civilization then you do as well.

[jules]

it's a serial comma, before "and" and its usage depends on various styles. Often it's not necessary, unless needed to avoid confusion.

Ah, thanks. Always knew it as the Oxford comma, myself; never heard it referred to like that before.

[arrowqueen]

75 out of 100. 99%.

I already knew I was a picky git.

[LightShadow]

The percent depends on age, so that really doesn't matter when it comes to the snob points, right. 76% for me, but I'm 39, so maybe it's more annoying than from other ages coming from me. I am pretty picky. "Shut up already," they say. Can't help it, errors drive me bonkers.