Tag Archives: grammar

Prescriptive grammar?

According to a Language Log post I saw first at A Teacher’s Education, the military wants us all to capitalize Soldier, even when it stands alone. Army Chief of Staff General Peter J. Schoomaker apparently thinks this will help instill respect for the people who are in the military.

It won’t work.

My first thought was not would people get it, but rather: would people DO it. I understand that we write, now (you and I, anyway, and your readers here), mostly according to the established pattern. But this seems like an iffy time to try such a thing: It seems to me (albeit as no historian) that the English language is accepting and conforming more and more to today’s digital shorthand — which basically ignores (intentionally or not) the accepted grammar rules.

I’d imagine the print media (which are resistent to change in grammar rules, particularly those pushed on them by people and institutions they’re working to guard against, as watchdogs) would ignore such a prescript. The AP Stylebook is notoriously slow to change — it was just in the last (yearly) edition that it finally conceded to popular opinion that internet shouldn’t be capitalized and that online doesn’t need a hyphen.

It’s good for the military to take charge of this where they can — but that’s basically in its own writings, which are seen by the general public quite rarely. Working at a newspaper, I saw a good chunk of them, and they, for several years now, have Soldier, Sailor, etc., capitalized. The copy desk routinely replaced all those capitalized letters for title standing alone with the lowercase letter. They corrected the releases. Capitalizing titles only before names is a long-standing tradition. It will be difficult to change. I’m sure a few publications will be quick to change — Stars and Stripes comes to to mind, although I’m not very familiar with it.

How long has it taken for a rule to change in the past? Take the serial comma, for instance. I was taught in high school (I had several different English teachers) that first the serial comma was used always, and later that it’s only used when needed for clarity. My nonuse of the serial comma was reinforced in college and in journalism classes particularly. Some teachers still require the serial comma’s use today, 12 years after I graduated from high school. Just because the government wants to institute a change in proper capitalization, does that mean it will happen? How many generations will it take for the change to take hold?

Finally, even if this did catch on, it’s a slippery slope. It’s no stretch that it would make writers rethink capitalization generally, and it would become a sign of a writer’s world view. Or, if a person is feeling particularly anti, he or she could simply not capitalize the titles (even with the names!) of the offending parties. What a mess.

How shoddy writing will deter customers

Reading Solar Style‘s relatively brief FAQ page — my husband suggested one of the company’s solar cell phone/iPod chargers for his birthday gift — I was turned off on the company. Why? The page contained at least six horrible typos.

Particularly when I’m studying a company I’m not familiar with, this kind of rampant lack of attention to detail is quite off-putting. Can I trust this company with my dollars? Is its warranty reliable? Or is this just a fly-by-night operation?

I’d like to think well of this organization. It’s promoting eco-responsibility, and that’s something I value. But I also don’t want to spend a chunk of money on equipment made by a company with perhaps shoddy workmanship. After all, if Solar Style leadership doesn’t care enough about its image to ensure clean writing (one of the most immediate reflections of its integrity to potential customers), why would I be confident about the quality of the company’s product?

Even though I know my husband would appreciate a solar charger, I doubt he’ll be getting one from me at this point, from this company.

Write well — cleanly, without errors, at least — or if you can’t accomplish this alone, hire qualified help in this field. It’s essential to successful business.

When to follow the rules

It seems I started something and haven’t finished it yet. Here’s a follow up.

It’s hard to set a hard-and-fast rule. So many such standards depend on context and local style.

• Ending sentences with prepositions is often OK, except perhaps in the most formal of writings. Even English teachers are beginning to accept this. See here and here.

• Double negatives generally confuse the reader and thus should be avoided. The goal, after all, is clear communication.

It’s one of the foundational concepts of mass communication: What you say and what is heard can be two very different things. One of a writer’s goals is to prevent that from happening.

I’ve tackled creating a local style guide in the past, but I’m not about to start from scratch and create an overarching style guide. For so many venues of communication, style guides already exist!

Rules vary, based on context — both the online/scholarly paper/email/letter to Mom context and the culture/geographical location of a piece of writing — and that’s a good thing. I agree with Grammar Girl that nearly every institution in existence should have a local style, in writing, though.

I love the many nuances of our language and its use. I love that it evolves: New words constantly being created illustrates that there’s always more for me to discover.

In general, I enjoy language. Too much dissection can harm that relationship. Disrespect can also cause a problem, though. Balance between rules and creativity is simultaneously essential and hard to find.

It’s important to note, however, that the rules of writing cannot be broken in the spirit of creativity without the writer’s knowledge of the standards. All writers, regardless of their context, should acquaint themselves with the rules of writing.