RSS

Category Archives: Language use

Bated or baited?

Another one of those homophones that trips people up – perhaps more in one direction than the other? I see “with baited breath” a fair bit, but not the opposite error – and in fact it’s all about this one phrase, really, isn’t it.

Baited can be used as an adjective to describe, for example, a fish hook that has had something tempting slotted onto it to lure a fish – “I lowered the baited hook into the water and waited for the bite”. It’s also the past tense of “bait”, to put bait in a trap or on a hook, or to deliberately taunt or annoy someone (or something sentient).

Bated in the sense we’re discussing here only exists in this precise form within this phrase – how interesting! More reason to make sure we keep using it correctly – you know how I get about wanting to preserve the intricacies of our amazing language … So – “with bated breath” means “in great suspense” and comes from a 16th century usage, the past participle of bate (restrain), coming from abate, which we do still use, of course.

Bate, by the way, describes an angry mood in informal British English “ooh, don’t get in a bate with me, I was only teasing”  and is also a falconry term describing when a hawk beats its wings in agitation and flutters off its perch. So now you know.

“I waited with bated breath as he baited his sister that little bit too much … and she eventually flew into a bate”

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
 

Tags: , , ,

On being edited

editsWriters are always being told by other writers (and editors) about the importance of being edited. But what does it actually feel like to have someone go through your precious words with that dreaded red pen? Only recently, as I’ve struggled with edits in my own book, have I realised how my clients must feel when they receive their poor corrected texts back from me. I hope this new understanding will help me to be a better editor …

On being edited

I’ve been putting together an e-book based on my Libro Full Time blog which has charted my experiences of going full-time self-employed. I pulled all the blog posts together, added some commentary, an introduction, fleshed it out a bit, read it through … but before I went to publish it I did as all good writers (should) do and considered having it edited.

I put a call out for beta readers and a few kind volunteers spoke up. One read it and made some excellent, useful comments, although I was a little thrown even then to see my words through someone else’s eyes. Another friend did EXACTLY as I hoped she would – she went through it line by line, picking out errors, suggesting better ways of writing sentences, AND commented on the structure, the way it hung together, how the experience of reading it could be improved.

This is the Thing: One It was like having ME edit that book. And I know I’m a decent editor

This is the Thing: Two I hated reading those comments the first time round

This is how I make my clients feel!

That was my first thought. No: my first thought was, “My text, my beautiful text! How dare she muck with it??” All defences up, all crests raised, spines bristling, eyes watering …

And I must be at pains to point out here that my friend:

  • Did it right – she said exactly what I would have said had the document been written by anybody else
  • Did it kindly – no snarkiness, no visible or invisible sighs
  • Did a good job – she picked up micro and macro errors
  • MADE THE TEXT BETTER – she really, really did

But my knee-jerk reaction, in pretty well this order, was

  • Anger – how dare she mess with my text? I write stuff all the time! It can’t be wrong! … oh …
  • Horror – how did I not notice THAT?
  • Shame – I was going to publish this pile of rubbish?
  • Embarrassment – someone has seen this in this state!
  • Despair – will I ever get this into shape or should I just give up now? I know, I’ll give up

In the interests of research, I’ve gone back and looked at the text. It’s fine: it can be whipped into shape and it will be a much better book for it.

Once I’d gone through these cycles of shame, horror, despair and … finally … acceptance, the terrible realisation dawned on me …

This is how my clients must feel when they get their work back from me

Is it just me, or is it everyone?

I asked some editor colleagues, writers and people I’ve worked with what being edited feels like to them. We all know it’s a worthwhile process – but I was after the emotional reaction.

My old friend, Annabelle Hitchcock from Yara Consulting reported that she feels quite comfortable about being edited, “but specifically about being edited by you, Liz. I know you and I trust you and I know that you know my writing style and won’t alter it into something that it’s not. I also trust you to give me feedback, and to make sure that I’m actually communicating what I THINK I’m communicating”. So that trust is very important, and makes it easier (although I trusted the ladies who looked at my text, too, of course … )

Trust comes up for Alison Mead of Silicon Bullet, too – “Personally for my blog posts, knowing I am going to be edited means I can type my stream of consciousness without worrying too much about grammar and spelling , so my words can have the flow they would if I was talking them – but I have the confidence that those errors will be picked up and corrected. To be honest I don’t notice the edits – so have no idea how many changes you actually make! It is good to have that trust and confidence about the job being done well!”.

So these two highlight the ideal working relationship between an editor and a writer. It’s worth noting that I have been working on small blog post texts for these two ladies for a few years now, and have known them for significantly longer. But how do you build up that trust instantly? And what if’ you’re an editorial and writing professional yourself?

Here’s someone who actively enjoys it, but do note that he still finds it challenging: “I enjoy being edited. It gives me a chance to see how other editors do things, gets me to think about things I have done unthinkingly, and reminds me that all writers, even if they are also editors, have blind spots sometimes. It is also a little nerve-racking, of course – but then many worthwhile things are!” – Sebastian Manley of Manley Editorial.

And another editor colleague, Katharine O’Moore Klopf of KOK Edit, has a similar emotional pathway to mine: “My initial reaction to being edited—and I’ve been an editor since 1984—is ‘Oh, #@&^!’ And then I start reading through the edits and nodding my head, thinking, ‘You know, that’s a good edit. I don’t know why I didn’t think of that.’ And by the time I’ve finished reviewing the edits, I’m thinking, ‘Thank goodness for editors!’ You’d think I’d go straight to the ‘thank goodness’ part by now, but there is always that first little shock.”

And what about fiction authors? I suspect that fiction and memoir writers are the ones most wedded to their words, as they are perhaps most personal to them (I might be wrong there, though!).

Steve Hewson, author of “The Wild Earth” writes,”I asked Linda Bates to edit my first novel. Prior to the process starting, I imagined that the it might be more of a grammatical check (necessary because a) I am very (and unavoidably) careless b) I don’t really know anything about grammar. However, it soon became clear that editing was a whole other level of input. Once I’d decided to put in the effort to properly respond to Linda’s editorial suggestions (I was rather busy and somewhat tired of the whole affair prior to giving it to Linda) I found it really challenging and enjoyable.” So there’s the c-word again – “challenging”. Steve has gone on to kindly describe the whole process for us:

“I remember being aghast that the first page (which I thought was pretty good) had loads of changes suggested. (17, after counting them!). Then on the next pages I saw that Linda had added many comments concerning word definitions, writing styles and so on. I was dismayed at the clear time implications of working on these and also thought that Linda might be overdoing the proofreading job. However, I took the plunge and accepted the changes and realised that the result was more streamlined and clean.

Once I had decided to devote my energies to reworking the book I soon got into the stride and began to welcome the editorial changes rather than dread them. I think that being edited is rather similar to being filmed whilst teaching or lecturing: unconscious habits of pen are unearthed in the same way that the camera reveals unconscious habits of speech (such as saying ‘erm’ very frequently). I realised that I made frequent use of double adverbs. It was really very tough (see what I did there …) to realise that this habit made the text less engaging, but was good to realise this.

The sort of comment that I never got used to were those concerning the ways that the characters spoke or behaved. I love my characters and to be told ‘X wouldn’t say that sort of thing’ was always met defensively. I was particularly distressed to be told that I had (at a key moment) unconsciously reinforced gender stereotypes with Gracie. This was a difficult pill to swallow, especially since I had deliberately attempted to eliminate this sort of thing. Still I emerged a better person for it, and Gracie has a little more action at a key part of the book. I’m sure she’d thank me for it …”

Thanks to Steve for that great description of what it feels like to be edited – I’m sure my fellow editors will read it with great interest!

How do we make it right?

So, as editors, how do we make this process as smooth as possible for our clients? I have realised that they will never just grab the new document with joy, making all the changes immediately and unquestioningly. Well, some of them will, but going by the comments I garnered and discussed above, only people I’ve known for years who just have little bits and bobs for me to work on are likely to do that.

As for the rest of them, well, now I have some inkling of how they feel when they receive my annotated manuscript back, I’m going to make these resolutions:

  1. Try to build trust first of all – I already send links to my references, and many of my clients come via recommendation – and I have a new procedure whereby I send the style sheet I’ve put together during the editing process to the author at the end, thus proving I know what I’m doing and there are reasons for my choices.
  2. Remain kind. Sometimes I do get a little exasperated. But I, too, make the same mistakes throughout, repeat myself and am not always consistent. So why should I expect anyone else to be any different?
  3. Understand that when the client asks a question, sometimes they just need reassurance that they’re  not stupid or rubbish at writing. And they are almost never casting doubt on my ability, but either wanting to know why in order to make their writing better, or being anxious generally.
  4. Make sure I praise as well as criticise. I do try to do this already; I will try to do it more, now. Whether they’ve written a great bibliography or coined a smart turn of phrase, even if they’ve just managed to avoid plagiarising or quoting Wikipedia this time round, there’s always something to praise and I must find it and mention it.

—-

Has this article struck a chord? Are you a writer with something to say about your emotional reaction to being edited? Are you an editor who’s found ways to smooth this emotional path? Do share in the comments!

 

Pacific or specific?

DictionariesI don’t know about you, but I had suspected that this one was something of an urban myth, encountered only in sitcoms or observational comedy. As I came across it myself, yesterday, in a verbal interaction, I do suspect that it only appears verbally, and not in written form, in its non-ironic instances. (I don’t go in for finger-pointing for the sake of it, but if you do come across a written instance, do let me know.)

So, for the avoidance of doubt:

Pacific means peaceful in either intent or character (or both), or related to the Pacific Ocean.

Specific, which I would like to hazard a guess is 99.9% of the time the word the user means to use, means precise, clear, clearly defined – so “would you like your new mattress delivered on a specific date or don’t you mind when it arrives?” and is also used in relation to a particular subject – “These tufts are specific to this particular kind of mattress”.

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on February 11, 2013 in Errors, Language use, Troublesome pairs, Writing

 

Tags: , , ,

Zeros or zeroes?

DictionariesI have to admit that I had never given this one any consideration until it came up in something I was working on yesterday, and I had to look it up to check. So: zeros or zero?

Zeros is a plural noun, and oddly enough it’s the plural of zero. No e when you have lots of zeros.

Zeroes is a form of the verb to zero (in), meaning either to set a measuring device back to zero (I have never heard or read this myself, but M confirms that he uses it with measurement devices in his scientific job!), or to home in on something: “She zeroed in on the fact that he had hidden the muddy boots in the shed”.

So the noun has no e – “there are too many zeros in this post” and the verb does have an e – “my reader zeroes in on the fact that I had to look it up and contacts me to ask me why I don’t know everything off the top of my head”.

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on January 11, 2013 in Errors, Language use, Troublesome pairs, Writing

 

Tags: , , ,

Top Libro posts this year

Stats

Arrow: when I started blogging!

I received an update from WordPress about my stats for the year this morning, and was inspired to have a look at the top posts on this blog in various categories.

I hope you found some of these useful or entertaining, or discover them anew today!

Top Five Word short cuts posts

1 What to do if your comment boxes go tiny in Word – written over a year ago and still going strong

2 How to put text in alphabetical order in Word – a relatively new post but gaining momentum

3 Customising Track Changes – the most popular of the series I did on Track Changes

4 What to do if my comment boxes are running right to left – ah, those comment balloons!

5 Working with Track Changes in a document – recent and helpful to clients and visitors

Top Five Troublesome Pairs

1 On route or en route – still going strong with more hits every week!

2 Yours or yours; your or you’re – people still get it wrong, though …

3 Comparative or comparable – hits every week!

4 Themself or themselves - always a tricky one

5 Asterisk or Asterix – I wrote this for a giggle although it was based on a real example

Top Five business-related posts

1 What is transcription?  – related to what I do rather than straight business but very popular

2 What is copy-typing? – I don’t do much of this, but people certainly search for it!

3 Proofreading as a career – I’m glad I wrote this as I do get asked and people obviously want to know!

4 Is it actually worth the stress? – inspired by a friend who has gone on to flourish!

Top Five small business chats

1 Dick Margulis – editing and book production. He put a link on his blog and talked about it …

2 Liz Light – a local person so local Tweeters picked this one up

3 Liz Broomfield – who, me? Blush!

4 Lindsay McLoughlin – we proofreaders know how to spread the word online, don’t we!

5 Tammy Ditmore – and the editors do, too!

Top Five posts overall

1 On route or en route – OK, sometimes I do slightly tire of this one. I should be grateful, I know.

2 What to do if your comment boxes go tiny in Word – made me realise my blog could be popular

3 What is transcription?  – you can’t assume people know what you do!

4 How to put text in alphabetical order in Word – did you realise you could do it automatically?

5 What is copy-typing? – see 3!

Bottom Five, unloved posts

1 What I did in July – to be fair, from last year. But I don’t bother with these now as they’re not popular

2 Happy Christmas 2010 – 1 view this year (25 all time) – the 2011 and 2012 posts have had 58 and 161 views respectively, showing how my audience has grown!

3 Be careful: literally – I did think this would get more views … people don’t like the more ranty posts, though

4 Test match … special – limited interest or just misguided?

5 Stationery or stationary – this does surprise me

 

Tags: , ,

Slay or sleigh?

DictionariesSomeone told me that they had actually seen this one on a festive poster last week, so welcome to the Christmas 2012 Troublesome Pair!

To slay is to kill in a violent manner. You can also use it in a metaphorical way: “I’m going to slay that demon and face up to the supermarket on Christmas Eve”.

Slay (as a noun) is also an alternative spelling for sley, which is a tool which is used in weaving, to push the weft into place. No, I didn’t know that either, and I’m guessing that the author of the unfortunate poster wasn’t talking about Santa and his weaving activities.

A sleigh is a sledge drawn by reindeer or horses. A sledge is a vehicle set on runners which is used to travel over snow and ice, propelled by gravity downhill or pushed or pulled. Oh, and a sled is a North American term for sledge. Don’t say I don’t give you added value!

Season’s Greetings and I hope you enjoy 2013′s Troublesome Pairs and Trios!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
4 Comments

Posted by on December 24, 2012 in Errors, Language use, Troublesome pairs, Writing

 

Tags: , , ,

Silicon or silicone?

I have to admit that I hadn’t fully grasped the differences between these two. So I’m guessing lots of other people hadn’t done either. And the dictionary is quite opaque on this, talking about chemical compounds rather than the essential, understandable differences, although my trusty “New Oxford Style Manual” does better.

Silicon is a naturally occurring element (symbol Si) which is hard and durable and used in the silicon chips inside computers.

Silicone is a synthetic compound of silicon, and this is the one that’s used in breast implants and cooking utensils: it can be a liquid or gel as well as a solid.

So, actually two that it’s a good idea NOT to get mixed up!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
 

Tags: , , ,

Pair, pear or pare?

It’s homonym time in Libro Towers, with this classic easily confused trio …

A pair is a set of two things which are joined together or otherwise considered as a unit – including people or animals which are considered together – a pair of naughty boys; a pair of horses used to pull a carriage; a pair of wires twisted together to conduct your home phone signal.

A pear is an edible fruit or the tree that bears that fruit.

To pare (notice that this one’s a verb where the others are nouns) is to trim something by cutting the outer edges off, so you might pare an apple to take the skin off – it also has a more metaphorical meaning around reducing or diminishing something in stages rather than all at once, like taking the outer then inner layers off a piece of fruit, so you might pare down staffing levels gradually rather than sacking everyone at once.

So, if you had two pieces of fruit and you wanted to remove the skin from them, you might pare a pair of pears!

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
 

Tags: , , ,

Lightning, lightening or lighting?

Several people have mentioned this trio to me, so it’s time to set it all out and explain it …

Lighting is the system or arrangement of lights, in a home or a theatre or film studio or wherever there are lights, or the effect that this arrangement has – “The lighting in the scene gives a feeling of doom”.

Lightening means becoming lighter in weight – “He was lightening the balloon by throwing out the ballast, and we went up, up and away!” or paler in colour – “She’s been lightening her hair again”. It also  has a technical, gynaecological meaning to do with wombs: you can look that up yourselves, as I think that’s one of those terms that you will know if you need to know it.

Lightning is the visual presentation of the electrical discharge between clouds, or between clouds and objects, during a thunderstorm. As a modifier, it also means very quick, linking of course to the very quick nature of lightning itself, as in, “His lightning reflexes meant he caught the pint glass before it hit the floor”.

You can find more troublesome pairs here and the index to them all so far is here.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on December 7, 2012 in Errors, Language use, Troublesome pairs, Writing

 

Tags: , , ,

Bullet points – grammar and punctuation

Last week we talked about when to use bullet points and how to personalise them. This week, we’re going to have a look at the actual language of bullet points, including top tips on making them easy to understand for the reader. There are two parts to this: word forms / grammar and punctuation.

Punctuation in bullet points

Over recent years there has been a shift towards less punctuation and “cleaner” looking documents. I remember this being called “open” punctuation, and it’s the difference between typing an address as:

1, Avenue Gardens,

Brighton,

BN1 1AA.

and

1 Avenue Gardens

Brighton

BN1 1AA

Of course there is a place for punctuation, but it can get a bit messy looking, and I’m all for clean lines as long as you don’t forget your semi colons within normal runs of text!

So, here are some things not to do. We never introduce a list in a sentence with a semi colon, and we don’t introduce a bulleted or numbered list with one, either.

It used to be the case that we included semi colons and even “and”s at the end of every line. But I think that does look old-fashioned and cluttered nowadays …

Regarding the full stop at the end of the last bullet point … well, the jury is out on that one. It’s one of those style choices that don’t have a specific rule. I’ve checked in my New Oxford Style Manual and my Oxford Guide to Plain English: the former doesn’t talk about the punctuation much at all, and the latter has some general standards to consider following.

Here are my suggestions:

  • If the bullet points come in the middle of a sentence, and it is still clear when you read that sentence even though it’s got bullets in the middle, you can
    • start each bullet point with a lower case letter
    • put a full stop at the end.
  • If the bullet points are very short and don’t form a sentence, like this:
    • Start with a capital
    • Don’t add full stops
    • Use full stops sparingly
  • It is fine to add a full stop at the end of each bullet if the bullet points are long and include:
    • More than one line of text which therefore forms a solid block when you look at it on the page.
    • More than one sentence. It would look odd to have a full stop there and not here.

In summary:

But the single most important thing to do is KEEP IT CONSISTENT within each bulleted list! If you use capital letters or lower case letters to start each bullet, keep them the same throughout. If you end the first bullet with a full stop, end each of them with a full stop.

But of course, you can use different styles for different lists, as the context demands, although I’d be wary of having wildly different ones very close together, as it can look messy.

And this point on keeping it consistent brings me on to …

Grammar in bullet points

We insert bullet points into a text to make it more easy for the reader to understand. This means that the grammar within the bullet points should be consistent, so the reader doesn’t end up scratching their head and going over and over the same bit of text, trying to work it out.

Have a look at this example, and you’ll see what I mean:

Even if the reader can understand the basic sense of this, the uncomfortable disconnect between the different grammatical forms bring the reader’s attention to the form of the text and not the meaning of its content. And that’s not what good, clear writing should do. However, this is one of the most common mistakes I find in the text I proofread and edit. Especially if the bulleted list is long, the writer will lose track part way through and start going all inconsistent.

This is what that list above should look like:

Nice and tidy: everything following the same structure.

The grammar of bullet points must be consistent and matching so that the reader is not confused. It’s a different matter with the punctuation, which is, when it comes down to it, more of a matter of choice. Personally, I prefer capital letters and no full stop in my bullet points, which is why, if you’re my client and your bullet point punctuation is a little inconsistent, you’ll find me using that as standard!

So now you know all about how to insert and customise bulleted and numbered lists, and the grammar and punctuation to use with them! I hope you have found this helpful.

This is part of my series on how to avoid time-consuming “short cuts” and use Word in the right way to maximise your time and improve the look of your documents. Find all the short cuts here

Do let me know if this has helped you – and do share with the buttons at the bottom of this article.

 
6 Comments

Posted by on November 28, 2012 in Language use, New skills, Short cuts, Writing

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,819 other followers