Posts
I just realized that it's been over a year since I've updated my blog. (Bad blogger!) Just to maintain continuity, I'm posting an oldie but goodie, with some updates and a spelling correction (I'll let you find it on your own).
Editing has been a big part of my livelihood for about 15 years now. Certain words and phrases have the power to trigger my gag reflex. Many of those words and phrases appear with distressing frequency in business communications. As a cry for mercy, I am sharing links to three blog posts (one of them mine) as a guide to words and phrases that you must NEVER EVER EVER EVER USE! I'M NOT KIDDING! DON'T MAKE ME DO A GLOBAL SEARCH AND REPLACE ON YOUR DOCUMENT!! (whew, I got a little carried away there for a moment)
http://www.ragan.com/Main/Articles/42556.aspx
http://www.ragan.com/Main/Articles/43415.aspx
http://wordchemist.blogspot.com/2009/09/controlled-verbiage-act.html
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Controlled Verbiage Act
by Nancy McGuire
I'm a word person, and it bothers me when words are misused, over-used, used to obscure the speaker's intent, or otherwise abused. Here in the United States, we have a Controlled Substances Act, which classifies various drugs according to their medical uses and potential for addictiveness or abuse. Perhaps we need a Controlled Verbiage Act to regulate the use of certain words with a high potential for abuse.
The lowest level of enforcement would be reserved for words that are often misused, but you more or less know what the speaker meant. Examples would be the interchangeable use of "lay" and "lie", "effect" and "affect", "flaunt" and "flout". These are the Schedule IV words. They may be used by lay people without a prescription, but word processing programs should come equipped with directions for usage and warnings of the potential side effects when these words are not used as directed.
Moving on up the list, we have the Schedule III words. These can be used to convey a thought, but they have a high potential for overuse, even addiction. In addition, their misuse may do damage to the rest of the language by setting precedents for sloppiness and fuzzy thinking. Business writing is rife with Schedule III words and phrases. "At the end of the day", "at this point in time", "capturing value", you know the genre. Language-damaging words include such "verbed" nouns as "resulted", "impacted", and the abominable "architected". Throw in such commonly used, but unhelpful, words as "utilize". These words should be kept behind the counter at the editor's shop, and those wishing to use them should present some form of identification and sign a statement that these words are being used in a satirical fashion, as dialogue in a work of fiction or a stage play, as a direct quotation in a news story or documentary, or in professionally-written linguistic performance art.
Schedule II words have legitimate linguistic uses, but they are almost universally misused when placed in the hands of amateurs. These words include "enormity", "comprise", "quantum", and other impressive-sounding but poorly understood terms. When these words are misused, the reader can be left wondering whether the author meant to say that the new shopping mall is a disgrace and an abomination, or merely that it is very large.
Schedule I words have no use other than to demean, disgrace, or belittle other people or to suggest acts of violence or subjugation. You know what these words are. I'm not going to repeat them here.
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label writing. Show all posts
Friday, August 5, 2011
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Getting what you pay for and paying for what you get
This link goes to a blog posting entitled "How to Hire (Scam) a Writer" . The posting is a couple of years old, but it still applies, and it applies to writers in just about any situation, not just freelance web writers.
http://allfreelancewriting.com/2007/07/10/web-writing/how-to-hire-scam-a-writer/
The whole focus on mass quantity production, short turnaround times, rock-bottom pay, and 24 x 7 availability guarantees that you won't be getting a writer's best work. What in the world would make you think otherwise?
http://allfreelancewriting.com/2007/07/10/web-writing/how-to-hire-scam-a-writer/
The whole focus on mass quantity production, short turnaround times, rock-bottom pay, and 24 x 7 availability guarantees that you won't be getting a writer's best work. What in the world would make you think otherwise?
Sunday, September 27, 2009
The Controlled Verbiage Act
I'm a word person, and it bothers me when words are misused, over-used, used to obscure the speaker's intent, or otherwise abused. Here in the United States, we have a Controlled Substances Act, which classifies various drugs according to their medical uses and potential for addictiveness or abuse. Perhaps we need a Controlled Verbiage Act to regulate the use of certain words with a high potential for abuse.
The lowest level of enforcement would be reserved for words that are often misused, but you more or less know what the speaker meant. Examples would be the interchangeable use of "lay" and "lie", "effect" and "affect", "flaunt" and "flaut". These are the Schedule IV words. They may be used by lay people without a prescription, but word processing programs should come equipped with directions for usage and warnings of the potential side effects when these words are not used as directed.
Moving on up the list, we have the Schedule III words. These can be used to convey a thought, but they have a high potential for overuse, even addiction. In addition, their misuse may do damage to the rest of the language by setting precedents for sloppiness and fuzzy thinking. Business writing is rife with Schedule III words and phrases. "At the end of the day", "at this point in time", "capturing value", you know the genre. Language-damaging words include such "verbed" nouns as "resulted", "impacted", and the abominable "architected". Throw in such commonly used, but unhelpful, words as "utilize". These words should be kept behind the counter at the editor's shop, and those wishing to use them should present some form of identification and sign a statement that these words are being used in a satirical fashion, as dialogue in a work of fiction or a stage play, as a direct quotation in a news story or documentary, or in professionally-written linguistic performance art.
Schedule II words have legitimate linguistic uses, but they are almost universally misused when placed in the hands of amateurs. These words include "enormity", "comprise", "quantum", and other impressive-sounding but poorly understood terms. When these words are misused, the reader can be left wondering whether the author meant to say that the new shopping mall is a disgrace and an abomination, or merely that it is very large.
Schedule I words have no use other than to demean, disgrace, or belittle other people or to suggest acts of violence or subjugation. You know what these words are. I'm not going to repeat them here.
The lowest level of enforcement would be reserved for words that are often misused, but you more or less know what the speaker meant. Examples would be the interchangeable use of "lay" and "lie", "effect" and "affect", "flaunt" and "flaut". These are the Schedule IV words. They may be used by lay people without a prescription, but word processing programs should come equipped with directions for usage and warnings of the potential side effects when these words are not used as directed.
Moving on up the list, we have the Schedule III words. These can be used to convey a thought, but they have a high potential for overuse, even addiction. In addition, their misuse may do damage to the rest of the language by setting precedents for sloppiness and fuzzy thinking. Business writing is rife with Schedule III words and phrases. "At the end of the day", "at this point in time", "capturing value", you know the genre. Language-damaging words include such "verbed" nouns as "resulted", "impacted", and the abominable "architected". Throw in such commonly used, but unhelpful, words as "utilize". These words should be kept behind the counter at the editor's shop, and those wishing to use them should present some form of identification and sign a statement that these words are being used in a satirical fashion, as dialogue in a work of fiction or a stage play, as a direct quotation in a news story or documentary, or in professionally-written linguistic performance art.
Schedule II words have legitimate linguistic uses, but they are almost universally misused when placed in the hands of amateurs. These words include "enormity", "comprise", "quantum", and other impressive-sounding but poorly understood terms. When these words are misused, the reader can be left wondering whether the author meant to say that the new shopping mall is a disgrace and an abomination, or merely that it is very large.
Schedule I words have no use other than to demean, disgrace, or belittle other people or to suggest acts of violence or subjugation. You know what these words are. I'm not going to repeat them here.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Decluttering Project
The decluttering lady has come and gone (and her bill showed up on the credit card statement I got yesterday). The Salvation Army truck has come and gone, taking a good bit of my excess stuff. And I spent a good part of this weekend finding the proper little niches for all the stuff that hadn't found homes yet. As usual, it took 80% of the time to find places for that last 20% of the stuff. But I feel like I can breathe now. Here are some before-and-after photos.
And wouldn't you know. Just as I was finishing the project (the living room/writers studio part), my good friend, The Other Nancy M, invited me to lunch today to remind me that I had agreed to co-author a book with her. The project will find the writer, as Rachel Carson said. So -- in a couple of weeks, we will start regular biweekly meetings. The goal is to be finished by next Spring.
And of course, I have a zillion ideas for op-eds, and all I need to do is pick one and write the darned thing. And send it to the mentor program at the Op-Ed project to have it vetted and help me shop it around for publication.
But now, I have a space that is conducive to doing that sort of thing, so I have no more excuses. And I got word today that the Washington Ethical Society is starting a concerted effort to form and support a community of creative people, which is something I have been talking about in the abstract for a few years now. So it looks like the Universe is taking me seriously and removing my reasons to remain stuck, one by one. And that's a good thing.
And wouldn't you know. Just as I was finishing the project (the living room/writers studio part), my good friend, The Other Nancy M, invited me to lunch today to remind me that I had agreed to co-author a book with her. The project will find the writer, as Rachel Carson said. So -- in a couple of weeks, we will start regular biweekly meetings. The goal is to be finished by next Spring.
And of course, I have a zillion ideas for op-eds, and all I need to do is pick one and write the darned thing. And send it to the mentor program at the Op-Ed project to have it vetted and help me shop it around for publication.
But now, I have a space that is conducive to doing that sort of thing, so I have no more excuses. And I got word today that the Washington Ethical Society is starting a concerted effort to form and support a community of creative people, which is something I have been talking about in the abstract for a few years now. So it looks like the Universe is taking me seriously and removing my reasons to remain stuck, one by one. And that's a good thing.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
It's OK to Play
Every now and then, I get an aha! moment. Not always at the most convenient times, but worth capturing and remembering even so. I got one of those last night as I was reading myself to sleep, and it woke me up again like a persistent toddler about 5AM today. And now, here it is almost 9PM and the idea still sounds good to me, so I'm passing it along to you.
I'm in an extended conversation these days with some fairly serous, highly educated folks, who want to nurture and develop their creative talents. Some do it for their own pleasure, and some as a way of expressing their deep, important capital-T Truths to those who come after them. The pleasure folks seem happy with craft projects and dabbling and just enjoying things in general. The capital-T Truth people are a bit disdainful of the whole thing, because you see, they are past that childlike stage and they must devote their time to perfecting their art. All that inner child stuff and writing with your non-dominant hand and representing your dreams in sand trays is all right if you are a blocked artist, or a mere hobbyist, or a beginner. Once you get past that stage, there is serious business to be done.
The aha! came as I was reading David Jauss' "Alone With All That Could Happen". The third chapter -- the one that talks about rhythm and flow. He starts out talking about the writing techniques of varying one's sentence lengths and cadences to influence the pace and fluence of the story, then moves on to the pacing and flow of chapters, sections, entire books. It's the kind of stuff that makes you want to go back to that short story with the ending that doesn't quite work and diagram it to death to see what's wrong with the danged thing.
But then. Jauss starts talking about the "musical unconscious". Stories that exist in a sort of pre-verbal language before the words form around them. Writers walking around going, "aah. aah." because the story has an aah in it, but they don't know if it's a cat or a camera or a hammer. Apparently, he has some scientific studies to back this up. The mind is equipped with an inborn "assembly language" (to lapse into computer-speak), an internal operating code that requires an interface to translate it into English, or French, or Navajo. A rhythm that you recognize but can't quite articulate.
And that's why we dabble and play and indulge the goofy thoughts, odd sound effects, warped observations, Dali-esque dream sequences. These are a way of speaking with and listening to the pre-verbal utterances that come from so deep within that we aren't even aware of it most of the time. Didn't you ever wonder why your best story ideas came at the oddest times and places? Why the title of someone else's play turns into your very different novella. Why your neighbor's whiskey bottle collection in his living room window grabs you by the lapels and forces you to remember something you dreamed 3 years earlier. Why that poem or book chapter seemed to write itself, relegating you to the role of stenographer?
Haven't you ever read prose where the technique was flawless, but it seemed flat, lifeless, derivative? The author has Tolkien's technique down cold, but the writing doesn't draw you into that magical world. The whole thing has a paint-by-numbers feel to it, and you can see the bits of technique poking out like outlines on a badly doctored photograph. Like a Beatles tribute band that gets all the notes right, but doesn't make you wanna dance like John, Paul, George, and Ringo did. Skim through the editors' preferences in Writer's Market and count how many times the phrase "writing class" is used in a snarky way.
No, technique and polishing and crafting all come later. You start with the 3AM idea, the bit of a song stuck in your head, the "aah, aah", the drumming of your pencil on your desktop. You go with the goofy, the skewed, the "where am I going with this". And you let it grow unhindered until it's strong enough to withstand your pruning and trimming. Would you prune a half-inch seedling?
Yes, you can try to emulate the masters. Learn from their success. By all means. But if you don't start with your very own inspiration, anything you do will look like a knock-off. They said it first, and they said it better. You start with your own stuff, and even if what you wind up with is a little rough around the edges, it's yours. Go back and look at those masters. Didn't they speak with their own voices? Wasn't that what made them great?
I'm in an extended conversation these days with some fairly serous, highly educated folks, who want to nurture and develop their creative talents. Some do it for their own pleasure, and some as a way of expressing their deep, important capital-T Truths to those who come after them. The pleasure folks seem happy with craft projects and dabbling and just enjoying things in general. The capital-T Truth people are a bit disdainful of the whole thing, because you see, they are past that childlike stage and they must devote their time to perfecting their art. All that inner child stuff and writing with your non-dominant hand and representing your dreams in sand trays is all right if you are a blocked artist, or a mere hobbyist, or a beginner. Once you get past that stage, there is serious business to be done.
The aha! came as I was reading David Jauss' "Alone With All That Could Happen". The third chapter -- the one that talks about rhythm and flow. He starts out talking about the writing techniques of varying one's sentence lengths and cadences to influence the pace and fluence of the story, then moves on to the pacing and flow of chapters, sections, entire books. It's the kind of stuff that makes you want to go back to that short story with the ending that doesn't quite work and diagram it to death to see what's wrong with the danged thing.
But then. Jauss starts talking about the "musical unconscious". Stories that exist in a sort of pre-verbal language before the words form around them. Writers walking around going, "aah. aah." because the story has an aah in it, but they don't know if it's a cat or a camera or a hammer. Apparently, he has some scientific studies to back this up. The mind is equipped with an inborn "assembly language" (to lapse into computer-speak), an internal operating code that requires an interface to translate it into English, or French, or Navajo. A rhythm that you recognize but can't quite articulate.
And that's why we dabble and play and indulge the goofy thoughts, odd sound effects, warped observations, Dali-esque dream sequences. These are a way of speaking with and listening to the pre-verbal utterances that come from so deep within that we aren't even aware of it most of the time. Didn't you ever wonder why your best story ideas came at the oddest times and places? Why the title of someone else's play turns into your very different novella. Why your neighbor's whiskey bottle collection in his living room window grabs you by the lapels and forces you to remember something you dreamed 3 years earlier. Why that poem or book chapter seemed to write itself, relegating you to the role of stenographer?
Haven't you ever read prose where the technique was flawless, but it seemed flat, lifeless, derivative? The author has Tolkien's technique down cold, but the writing doesn't draw you into that magical world. The whole thing has a paint-by-numbers feel to it, and you can see the bits of technique poking out like outlines on a badly doctored photograph. Like a Beatles tribute band that gets all the notes right, but doesn't make you wanna dance like John, Paul, George, and Ringo did. Skim through the editors' preferences in Writer's Market and count how many times the phrase "writing class" is used in a snarky way.
No, technique and polishing and crafting all come later. You start with the 3AM idea, the bit of a song stuck in your head, the "aah, aah", the drumming of your pencil on your desktop. You go with the goofy, the skewed, the "where am I going with this". And you let it grow unhindered until it's strong enough to withstand your pruning and trimming. Would you prune a half-inch seedling?
Yes, you can try to emulate the masters. Learn from their success. By all means. But if you don't start with your very own inspiration, anything you do will look like a knock-off. They said it first, and they said it better. You start with your own stuff, and even if what you wind up with is a little rough around the edges, it's yours. Go back and look at those masters. Didn't they speak with their own voices? Wasn't that what made them great?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)