Nat: Okay: "heart's content": ess apostrophe, apostrophe ess, no apostrophe?
My Boss: Apostrophe ess.
Nat: But it's used as a plural--"their hearts--no apostrophe--content"--so ess apostrophe, right?
My Boss: Are they using "their" instead of "his" or "hers"?
Nat: "Their" as in "the trainer's and the dog's."
My Boss: Yeah, then go with ess apostrophe.
Showing posts with label rewrites. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rewrites. Show all posts
what the ess?
punctuating quote marks within quote marks
"Ask yourself 'how' rather than 'why'."
What's wrong with it?
Punctuation. If you're asking yourself a question, you should punctuate it as such--which also means you need proper placement of your punctuation marks.
How do you fix it?
Since you're asking yourself a question, you need to format the question like you would any other statement, which usually means you put a comma in front of the spoken text, capitalize the first word, and, since it's a question, end it with a question mark.
That part's easy enough, but what about the period following "why"?
Since "why" gets a question mark, that's all the punctuation we need to end the sentence, but suppose it didn't end on a question: Would the period still go between the single quote mark and the double quote mark?
Nope. Logically it may make sense (though the most sensible place to put the period would be outside the double quote mark), but we do things strangely in America, at least when it comes to punctuation, so, as the style guide says:
When both single and double quotation marks occur at the end of a sentence, the period falls within both sets of marks.
Correct sentence:
"Ask yourself, 'How?' rather than, 'Why?'"
i.e. vs. e.g.
e.g. is Latin for "exempli gratia" -- for example
i.e. is Latin for "id est" -- that is
Both are used for clarification, but they're not interchangeable.
The use of e.g. should be followed by examples, for example, in the sentence
Be sure to eat your vegetables, e.g. carrots, peas, and lettuce.
The use of i.e. should be followed by a rephrasing of the statement, that is to say you don't list a series of examples, rather you reword and perhaps elaborate on what you said to make it easier to understand.
But it can get confusing when someone rephrases a statement by making an analogy, e.g.
It's like writing a book of poetry, i.e. it's like dropping a rose petal down the Grand Canyon and waiting for the echo.
I'm not sure why this would throw many people off, but apparently it does, probably because analogies tend to be abstract, and when you're being abstract for the sake of clarification, well, much like that sentence, you look ridiculous.
The way I tell them apart is by substituting "such as" for "e.g." (just another reason to read rule v of the greatest treatise on writing there is), that usually makes it clear whether you're reading examples or a rephrasing.
If you still have trouble, you probably shouldn't be using the terms in the first place, i.e. you're a buffoon, e.g. an ape, a mongoloid, a fool.
brevity
Their stories of healing and persistence serve as examples that it’s never too late to start over.
What’s wrong with it?
The phrase “serve as examples” is wordy and takes emphasis away from the sentence’s main idea: It’s never too late to start over.
How do you fix it?
English has a dizzyingly vast vocabulary, so chances are there’s a single word that encapsulates “serves as an example.”
“Prove” seemed like an acceptable substitute in terms of brevity, but it slightly altered the meaning, making it sound like the stories of healing and persistence were the only two examples when the author wrote that they were among a few.
After quick trip to dictionary.com’s thesaurus, we found a better word in “show.”
We replaced “serve as examples” to “show.” (And don’t forget that all three—“show,” “prove,” and “serve”—refer to “stories,” so the verb needs to be plural.)
Correct sentence:
Their stories of healing and persistence show that it’s never too late to start over.
Remember Orwell's two rules:
(ii) Never us a long word where a short one will do.
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
Stick with those, and you'll seldom go wrong.
pronoun misuse
We need to start with an inspiration, and then you need a plan. You also need a solid basis.
What’s wrong with it?
It’s not parallel, the subject of the first clause is "we," whereas the subject of the next two clauses is "you."
What the author means to say is that the reader needs inspiration, a plan, and a solid basis.
The problem is that the author uses more than one pronoun to refer to the reader.
How do you fix it?
Easy: Just replace "we" with "you."
Correct sentence:
You need to start with an inspiration, and then you need a plan. You also need a solid basis.
An even better sentence would be:
You need inspiration, then a plan, and then a solid basis.
