Half a century ago, when I briefly worked at Harvard University Press, I would hear editors refer to the series comma as the “Harvard comma.” They said it without apparent self-consciousness. I have not encountered the term since, and I am careful not to use it.
I can live with a lot of this. However, I draw the line in the cement at adverbs. RZ Sheppard wrote: "Adverbs are the pot belly of prose." He always had, and has, something to say, and the prospect of his demanding a fourth revision is too painful to contemplate. "Al chayt."
Yes, and Kurt Vonnegut wrote: "Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college." Which manages to be both offensive and idiotic. Everyone has something to say. Perhaps I should advocate never writing words that are six letters long; I could become famous for it.
I categorize “myriad” with “comprise,” as they are both words used incorrectly by people trying to sound smarter than they are. I put great faith in your point of view on most things, but I still feel the world would be a better place if “myriad” stayed in its lane as an adjective.
You may take that up with, among others, Milton and Thoreau. The word was used as a noun, and exclusively as a noun, for well over a century before anyone decided to make an adjective of it.
Thank you, Yolanda. Once I realized that it was easier for me to write like me than to write like some imaginary version of what I thought I should sound like, it all came together.
I overthink my sentences when I post comments to your thoughts. I want to say how much I enjoyed this post and how it reminded me of Dreyer's English, which I read right through with like enjoyment.
I'm going to hit Post before I edit myself into oblivion.
Nice to be back, and thank you. As you can quite possibly imagine, it's been a bit hard to concentrate on anything other than getting from point A to point, well, let's say, R, S, or T. (If it were Z we'd be in Hawaii.)
Re (17): Comments like those always send me scurrying to the OED to see how early the distinction was made in spelling. In this case, the two words have the same Latin root, which developed two branches of meaning in post-classical usage. The distinction of spelling in English arose in the 18th century, and the OED postulates that it was a deliberate attempt to distinguish the two meanings. So, a lot like "lede" vs. "lead".
I have occasionally mused on how the fact that "read" is the past tense of "read" can make for a hefty bit of reader confusion, but I guess we're not about to make "red" the past tense of "read." Though maybe we should try...?
So much to love. I'm a particular fan of "You are not A. A. Milne."
And even A. A. Milne wasn't always A. A. Milne!
Love this post. Like the old days. Like the book. Are those your beautiful blue leather wingtips in the photo with Sallie? 💖
Nope, those are his.
And thank you for loving the post!
There is a lot to love and learn here. I did read a story a number of years ago where someone "internally" shrugged. Boggles the mind.
I suppose I get it. But nah. It’s awfully close to “I was visibly moved by your kindness.”
Wow, all these rules—I am just thankful that people still read. That said, you write good.
Half a century ago, when I briefly worked at Harvard University Press, I would hear editors refer to the series comma as the “Harvard comma.” They said it without apparent self-consciousness. I have not encountered the term since, and I am careful not to use it.
Truly that's delightful and hilarious, and I'm glad to know it.
I can live with a lot of this. However, I draw the line in the cement at adverbs. RZ Sheppard wrote: "Adverbs are the pot belly of prose." He always had, and has, something to say, and the prospect of his demanding a fourth revision is too painful to contemplate. "Al chayt."
Yes, and Kurt Vonnegut wrote: "Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college." Which manages to be both offensive and idiotic. Everyone has something to say. Perhaps I should advocate never writing words that are six letters long; I could become famous for it.
Surely not famous.
Famed, perhaps. Feted. Celebrated. Known far and wide, even, though not widely.
But not famous.
"Adverb" has six letters. I was saying. Who invented the semi-colon anyway?
I categorize “myriad” with “comprise,” as they are both words used incorrectly by people trying to sound smarter than they are. I put great faith in your point of view on most things, but I still feel the world would be a better place if “myriad” stayed in its lane as an adjective.
You may take that up with, among others, Milton and Thoreau. The word was used as a noun, and exclusively as a noun, for well over a century before anyone decided to make an adjective of it.
All useful and some edifying. One of my favourite writing admonitions is “Do not affect a breezy manner.” You manage to hit just the right note, sir.
Thank you, Yolanda. Once I realized that it was easier for me to write like me than to write like some imaginary version of what I thought I should sound like, it all came together.
(I think.)
I love this! Thank you. xxx
Anyone who celebrates my favorite unit of punctuation, the semicolon, has my eternal love. And Sallie. Sallie also has my eternal love.
I overthink my sentences when I post comments to your thoughts. I want to say how much I enjoyed this post and how it reminded me of Dreyer's English, which I read right through with like enjoyment.
I'm going to hit Post before I edit myself into oblivion.
Thank you for the kind words, Sandra, and I’m sorry (truly) for having perhaps caused you excessive self-consciousness.
So relatable.
I find myself doing that same mental yoga anytime I'm emailing one of my several English professor friends!
Re (14): Say what?!
Brilliant, as always. Missed reading you and seeing new pictures of Sallie during your move. Welcome back!
Nice to be back, and thank you. As you can quite possibly imagine, it's been a bit hard to concentrate on anything other than getting from point A to point, well, let's say, R, S, or T. (If it were Z we'd be in Hawaii.)
Re (17): Comments like those always send me scurrying to the OED to see how early the distinction was made in spelling. In this case, the two words have the same Latin root, which developed two branches of meaning in post-classical usage. The distinction of spelling in English arose in the 18th century, and the OED postulates that it was a deliberate attempt to distinguish the two meanings. So, a lot like "lede" vs. "lead".
I have occasionally mused on how the fact that "read" is the past tense of "read" can make for a hefty bit of reader confusion, but I guess we're not about to make "red" the past tense of "read." Though maybe we should try...?
"yrede"?
Positively Chaucerian!
(As if I know anything about what’s Chaucerian and what isn’t.)
Re (24): Bravo.
Re (28): I wouldn't recommend trying to keep your finger in that dike. Two-word to one-word evolution is just too common to be useful opposed.