Rantings of a sub-editor

December 13, 2011

Learned/learnt and spelled/spelt

Filed under: Uncategorized — substuff @ 6:01 pm

"Can you point out the grain that attacked you, ma'am?"

These two pairs have long troubled me gently, and it came to a head last week when someone impertinently commented on Facebook (where, for reasons you need not worry about, I was talking about ‘commonly misspelt words’) ‘”Misspelt”?! “Misspelled”, please.’

To deal with spell first, here’s the thing. The Guardian style guide specifies spelled for the past tense and spelt for the past participle, The Times prefers spelt in both instances, The Economist says spelled is American English and spelt is British English and healthfood shops tell us spelt is a more primitive form of wheat. Then there’s the OED, which says both are fine but lists spelled first, and Collins, which agrees but lists spelt first.

Is learn any simpler? Nope. Now, my first chief sub told me to spell it learnt, so as not to confuse it with the adjective learned, as in ‘he’s a learned man’. The Guardian style guide, however, says not to write learnt ‘unless you are writing old-fashioned poetry’. The Economist says learnt is British English and learned is American English and The Times prefers learnt in both instances. Collins and the OED agree that either spelling is fine, and both list learned first.

Fowler, in a rare show of tolerance, acknowledges both learned and learnt, spelled and spelt, though he notes that the -t endings are more common in British English, and that learned is more common as the past form.

Right then. That’s as clear as mud. So, what do people actually do? I asked the question on Twitter, and discovered that they do all kinds of things. There was a slight preference for -t endings (most of my followers are British, so that makes sense), a lot of confusion and a few preferences, but none of the usual tubthumping. Basically, we’re all a bit unsure.

Do I have an answer? Not really, beyond that if someone starts throwing ‘?!’ combinations at you on Facebook, you’re well within your rights to tell them to bugger orf.

As a general rule, it seems that -t endings are a trait peculiar to the British, and as such have some connotations of old-fashionedness. If you’re writing for an international audience, you may wish to switch to -ed, but otherwise, as you were. Pick your preference and defend it to the death, or at least until someone comes up with a sensible argument for changing it.

What’s your preference?

December 5, 2011

Why ‘post’, not ‘after’?

Filed under: word choice — substuff @ 6:36 pm
Tags: ,

Dear businessperson,

You upset me when you write post but mean after. You lead me up the garden path with your tricksy words. See, I think you’re about to start talking about letters, mail and the Post Office. But you’re not. You just think after is a bit too dull, straightforward and English, and you fancy jazzing things up with a bit of Latin. But it’s really bloody unhelpful, actually.

Take this sentence (names have been changed to protect vulnerable parties): “What prospects are there for us post the proposals to tackle banana fraud?”

My eye doesn’t usually read a sentence in slow sequence – unless I’m deliberately reading slowly, I see the key words more or less at the same time. Consequently, when I look at this I’m expecting something about posting proposals. But is that what you mean? No. So I have to go back and read it slowly, and I don’t thank you for that, because I’m very busy and extremely important.

Now, what I really wanted to write here was that even in Latin, yes, even if we transported ourselves back to ancient Rome, you wouldn’t be able to use post like that because it’s a prefix. Postproposal, perhaps, but not post the proposals. However, having checked with a couple of people who actually know their Latin from their elbow (thank you @Nickety and @helendorritt) before making these wild assertions, I’ve discovered that I’m wrong. But, seeing as I’m wrong, I’ve decided that that’s not really the point.

The point is that when you wrote post, you meant after. So why not just say so? We don’t speak Latin, as I think I’ve just demonstrated (ahem). Also, although you meant after, I think that in this case considering would have been a better choice of word – if they’re proposals then the main concern is likely to be the concept rather than the chronological positioning. No?

In short, I’d just really like you to say what you mean. And if you do want to use post, other than in an existing word such as postmortem, posthumous, etc, save it for adjectival uses where after doesn’t quite suffice. Post-rant cup of tea, anyone?

Many thanks,

A. Reader

PS I am also fed up of reading about perfect storms. Please stop.

November 28, 2011

Three immoral chairs

Filed under: translation — substuff @ 11:31 am

I have received a Christmas round robin. Amid the details of loved ones’ alcoholism, thievery, death, depression, pyromania, body odour and unwashed underpants, there were these. Which are very funny.

The author is busy translating her website into French. She speaks French well, but was using Google Translate to speed up the process. Here’s she’s translated the translations back into English. Some of them are fantastic.

To get away from the “isn’t modern medicine rubbish” rant, I will finish with some of the inspired translations which Google has given me for my website when I have been feeling lazy.

The highlight of our holiday was the train ride (Lammas Family)
The nail in our holiday was the wrinkled train (Family of Sprouts)

There are many benches, a sandy area with swings, a balance-beam and a slide.
The abundance of puts offside, a desert with oscillators, a calm light-ray and a PowerPoint.

There are 3 easy chairs, a CD player with speakers and a sofa covered with a throw.
There are 3 immoral chairs, a CD player with orators and an appetiser covered with a fountain.

There is wooden decking. There is forest decorating.
Jigsaw puzzles and board games. Electric saw puzzles and plank games. (they sound dangerous!)

Lunchtimes was a problem word for Google. Pick a word, any word…..
Open lunchtimes = open conga-dancing Certain lunchtimes = certain arrivals

Some sentences were complete nonsense as though Google had given up entirely and resorted to word soup:

In peak season, park in town and catch the free bus to the beach.
If it’s the park of the season of point of your car in town and elevate the free bus on the beach.

Perhaps a drive out to a small, friendly, less busy restaurant? Go through the bar….
Perhaps a teaching assistant outside to a little, easy, poorly stocked restaurant? Walk sideways on the bar…

And some sounded definitely Chinese:

If you are going to be late I will stay up but please let me know.
If you want late I go stay until but do not hesitate to get to know me.

It is better to tell me about breakages when they happen.
It is in fact much cleaner in all broken when happening.

October 31, 2011

What I’ve been reading this week

Filed under: Links — substuff @ 10:45 am

Alert, alert, ranting sub in existential crisis. Well, not exactly. But it’s certainly true that I don’t find too much to rant about these days. Whether that’s because I’ve got it out of my system, I’m working with less rant-inducing copy or I’ve just gone blind, I don’t know. Anyway.

The more I know, the more I realise I don’t know. The more I realise I don’t know, the more inclined I am to listen to other people’s voices more and my own a bit less.

And so, I’m going to start sharing some of the interesting bits I come across, and thus bask in their reflected glory. Here’s a few things that have rocked my little world in the past week or two:

There was Ralph Fiennes, getting all worked up about Twitter ruining Shakespeare, or something.

“[Language] is being eroded — it’s changing. Our expressiveness and our ease with some words is being diluted so that the sentence with more than one clause is a problem for us, and the word of more than two syllables is a problem for us.” Read all about it (Daily Mail warning)

Blah. Much more interesting was this response on Language Log: Up in ur internets, shortening all the words.

If you weren’t too busy ruining language, you may have noticed that last week, a dog harnessed the power of electrostatic discharge – possibly in protest at local governance: Dog helps lightning strike Redruth mayor. This led me to a lovely post on Stan Carey’s Sentence First blog, on Crash blossoms.

There’s a hilarious post on Angry Sub-Editor’s blog, about the danger of promoting a sub-editor: Had they but one neck.

A little extract: “My gay friends tell me that sexual preference is hard-wired and so corrective therapy is pointless as well as immoral. You can say the same about being a sub-editor. Once you’ve been a sub-editor for a while, you can never go back. The down side is that there aren’t any cool bars where you can go and discuss gerunds and dangling participles.”

Read it and weep.

And then there was a great battle, or something. The Guardian’s David Marsh wrote a post about the which/that rule for the Mind Your Language blog: That’s the way to do it. The explanation was more in-depth than one I had heard previously, but the rule basically the same.

What surprised me was the level of protest. Several people posted to say that the rule was fictitious, baseless and a misinterpretation of something Fowler once said. There’s a good post here: That which is restrictive and Arnold Zwicky has gone one further and collated an inventory of postings on the topic.

I’m quite swayed. Obviously, much of what I write/edit is constrained by house style(s). But I’ll admit to a little which/that experimentation outside of work. I know, I’m cuh-razy.

Outside of language-focused things, I loved my sister Kaira’s graphic short story on love in a modern age, and also Joseph Stashko’s blog post on shy people (and X Factor). And I don’t even watch X Factor.

A big thumbs down, however, to Christina Patterson’s ‘open letter’ to Miriam Gonzalez (aka Mrs Clegg) in the Independent: So good that you make me feel bad. “Seeing pictures of you … makes almost every woman in the country feel just a little bit worse” is the pay-off. Wtf? Speak for yourself, Christina. If you really must.

That’ll do for now. I may update this list when I remember what else it is I’ve been reading. Feel free to add further links below.

October 23, 2011

Giri giri, fula fula, yula yula – kanpei!

Filed under: Japanese — substuff @ 6:01 pm

Ever since I started learning Japanese (which makes me sound much better than I am – sorry to disappoint, but when I say “learning Japanese”, I mostly mean “drinking with the Japanese”), I’ve had a soft spot for their onomatopaeic descriptions. They’re pairs of words that describe the sound something might make. Except that it might be something that has no sound – such as pika pika to mean sparkly or shiny, giri giri to mean arriving just in time (similar meaning to by the skin of your teeth), or muri muri, for “I can’t do it”.

I think they may be called reduplicative ideophones, but I’m not too familiar with the official terminology (feel free to wade in, those who are). I just like the words. So, as I currently have a Japanese guest staying/captive, here are ten:

fula fula
Being unable to walk straight when drunk (or exhausted, or carsick, etc). Fula is the sound of veering to the side, and comes from the verb meaning to call in at.

yula yula
The way a candle flame sways from side to side, or the way a voluptuous woman walks. Maybe oscillating.

kura kura
Feeling faint, dizzy or dreamy because you’ve seen or spoken to someone you fancy (particularly someone out of your league).

chika chika
When something is too bright and flashy, even garish. Similar to pika pika, but with a negative meaning.

bata bata
When you’re so busy that your actions become chaotic and confused. Bata is the sound of moving things in a hurry.

sara sara
Smooth or silky, like hair, or fine sand.

zara zara
Kind of the opposite of sara sara – used to describe rough, dry skin, or coarse sand.

kari kari
To be snappy, or short. I think it literally translates as snappy, as you can also call overcooked bacon kari kari. “Kari kari shineide” is “don’t be snappy”.

puri puri
A softer version of kari kari, meaning something more along the lines of touchy/irritable.

bura bura
To wander around, hang around or muck about without a purpose. By this point in the evening things were getting a bit tipsy, and my companion broke out into a song that went “chin chin, bura bura, sausage” (which means “cock, hanging around, sausage”) then looked at me as if that should explain everything. I’m not convinced it did, but I think it’s something like the opposite of mura mura (horny). Anyway. Moving swiftly on.

What I find particularly interesting about these is that none of them have kanji. That is, unlike almost all Japanese words, they don’t have picturegram symbols. Instead, they’re written in the phonetic alphabets. When they’re used to describe a sound, they’re written in hiragana, the traditional phonetic alphabet, but when they’re expressing concept, they’re written in katakana – an alphabet usually reserved only for foreign words and swear words.

However, there are a few exceptions – such as betsu betsu (to go halves), doh doh (to have self confidence or pride) and joh joh (to be in high spirits). These all have kanji.

I’ve been trying to think of similar words in English, but beyond itsy bitsy teeny weeny (weenie?) yellow polka dot bikini and higgledy piggledy, I’m not getting far. And they’re not really the same anyway, as they’re not exact repetitions. I suppose there’s so so.

Anyway. I don’t really have a conclusion, other than “look at these, aren’t they cool”. But I’d be interested to hear what others think of them, particularly people who know their linguistics or their Japanese, as I am very much an amateur in both fields. (I do like drinking sake, though.)

With thanks to 中野雅弘.

Tweet This!

October 17, 2011

Does x have a hyphen?

Filed under: hyphenation — substuff @ 7:16 am
Tags: ,

I’ve been looking at the search terms via which people come to my blog. And after from the filthy, the scary and the just plain weird (“blue ball with yellow hair”), the hyphen question is one of the most popular.

So, here’s a quick and simple guide to whether you need to hyphenate. It’s not definitive – some people will disagree – but it’s done me well.

There are various situations in which you need to use a hyphen, but the most common is the compound adjective before a noun. If adjectives and nouns are a distant memory for you, that means: two connected descriptive words, before a ‘thing’. If there’s no noun after the descriptive words, you don’t need to hyphenate them.

So:

This is a long-term approach.
We expect this approach to be long term.
In the short term, we plan to continue with this approach.

The garden was full of sweet-smelling flowers.
The flowers were sweet smelling.

The 50-year-old law is considered outdated by many.
The law is 50 years old and many consider it outdated.
Note: when writing about people, hyphenate their ages even if no noun follows (a three-year-old girl/a three-year-old, but: she is three years old).

The house needed an all-over clean.
The house needed to be cleaned all over.

If anyone’s wondering where this eclectic bunch of examples came from, they’re all from genuine Google searches via which people have ended up here.

I hope that’s helpful. If you want to know more (I worry, I really do), you can download this guide to hyphens and dashes, which I wrote last year at Which? – hence the slight skew towards consumer goods.

Or, if you have a hyphen query and you’re still not sure what to do, feel free to leave me a question in the comments below, and I’ll reply as promptly as work and gin allow.

October 8, 2011

Wanted: print prodcution sub-edtior

Filed under: spelling — substuff @ 7:52 am
Tags: , ,

Well, I guess there’s nothing like demonstrating how much you need the prospective employee.

Link (soon to be updated, one would hope) here.

October 4, 2011

The music bath

Filed under: foreign misunderstandings — substuff @ 6:54 pm

I came home on Sunday to find three Finnish blondes in my kitchen, busily cooking a cross between an apple crumble and a flapjack. This was courtesy of my flatmate Claire – clearly the Nicole Minetti to my Berlusconi.

One of them, Sana, was describing how Claire had taught her a new word: pickly hickly. Or was it pikelty hikelty? Ah no, it turned out to be higgledy piggledy.

“I love how you always teach me new words,” she said to Claire. “Like when you said to me ‘go take a music bath’ – I always remember that now.”

Claire and I look at each other. Go take a music bath?

“Yes,” says Sana. “Like if someone’s really bad at geography, you might say to them ‘go take a geography bath’.”

We are even more confused. So Sana relates the entire conversation leading up to the music bath comment.

“Aha,” says Claire. “You’re such a music buff!”

Love it. Not only all the wrong words, but also the opposite meaning.

September 28, 2011

Blogtailing betapreneurs?

Filed under: new words — substuff @ 12:58 pm
Tags: ,

I received this earlier today, from a source to remain unnamed. I’m not quite sure what to make of it. *Sob*

Check out these crazeee new words entering the realm of forecasting journalism.

They are words on a style sheet I came across. For some sort of UK publication that deals with future trends. Some of them are quite sexy? …….

Or are you not convinced?

They are for real!

Alphalux
Anarconomy Decade
Beauty+
Betapreneurs
Beyond Nostalgia
Beyond Retail
Bleisure
Bleisurites
Blingamalism
Blogtailing
Brand Personality Register (BPR)
Brandstanding
Brandtocracies
Choice Architecture
Coffee Plus
Concierge Culture
Considered Consumption
Consumer Attitudes Audit (CAA)
Conviviality Culture
3DIY Culture
Dreamtelligence
Embedded Marketing
F-Commerce
Female Web
Fifth Scenario
Fratrasexuals
Freesumerism
Future Media Landscapes
Gamification
Generation D
Generation Jones / Jonesers
Generation X / Xers
Hacktivism
Hobbyism
Homedulgence
Homestead 3.0
Impression Management
Intuitive Futures
Leanomics
Magtailing
Menaissance
Neo-Boomers
New Gents
New Mass Affluents / NMAs
New Male Dandy
New Millennials
New Normal
New Tyroleans
No-Frills Affluents / NFAs
Nu Austerity
Nu Trekkers
Open Brands
Patriot Purchasing
Prohibition Culture
Prohibition Gaming
Rebuilt Heritage
Retrosexuals
Revivalism
Rurbans
Rurbanites
Rurban Revolution
Show Your Working
Slash/Slash
Slowtopia
Supper Galleries
Sustainable Sushi
The New Sobriety
ThirtyfiveUps
Turbulent Teens
Ubiquitous Gaming Culture
Untethered Retail
Valuenomics
Webtailing 3.0
Womenomics
Yama Girls

September 19, 2011

Imagration

Filed under: funny typos — substuff @ 8:51 pm
Tags: ,

This was all over Brighton today. Good old Argus.

And the British complain that ‘imagrants’ can’t speak the language?!

« Previous PageNext Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 75 other followers