You Talking To Me? You Talking to Me?

I have to confess, I've actually never seen Taxi Driver. I mean, it came out when I was a kid.  And my parents weren't (and still aren't) movie fans. There was a family rule that no one (maybe it was just me and not my older brothers) could see a movie before my parents saw it and approved of it. This was before the days of PG-13. So it was either a G movie (which I would most likely be able to see) or PG (which was more up in the air...what exactly would be showing up on the screen could be all over the place).

So you can imagine my movie-going was severely limited. And certainly did not include Taxi Driver.

But I couldn't help but think of this iconic scene when I was thinking about repetition in manuscripts:

He repeats several lines here, most famously: "You talking to me? You talking to me?"

There are times when repetition works in a scene. If DeNiro didn't repeat himself here (in a scene that apparently was more off the cuff than on a script page), it wouldn't have such a lasting impact in the film world and be so recognizable.

So writers are well within their rights to have repetition in a scene. Even in a few sentences close together. After all, that's sometimes how people talk.

But other times, it seems as if the writer had forgotten the character had already said that. That's especially true when it's information (Bob's my uncle; have you met Bob, my uncle?) as opposed to a reaction (Oh my God. I can't believe he left. Oh my God. He's gone?).

And there's times I catch exact wording a few paragraphs apart. Those instances make me wonder whether there was some self-editing going on and the repetition didn't get caught.

So if you've gotten a manuscript back from me (or any other editor) asking about repetition, we do recognize it can be an effective storytelling tool. But hey, it's our job to make sure you're telling your story, not getting stuck in Groundhog Day!

Call Me

When you call someone in 2019, it's more likely than not that at least one of you will not be using a  landline, if not both of you.

Or, alternatively, you could be on what some people consider to be the most evil thing ever invented: a conference call!

But what to call those non-landline devices that we seemed to be glued to? It can take a picture, record a video, take you to the internet, has game apps that will keep your toddler (or bored teenager) out of your hair for five minutes, and, in some instances, has actually been used to place a phone call to someone!

In wonderful English language tradition (can you hear the sarcasm there?), it's either a smartphone (one word) or a cell phone (two words). Merriam-Webster has the same basic device with two different approaches: a one-word and a two-word form.{Yes, I know...some will call it a mobile phone.}

Does it make a huge difference if you used cellphone and smart phone instead? Probably not...the reader would still know what you mean. But it should at least be consistent in your manuscript. (And if I am lucky enough to read through your manuscript, it'll be cell phone or smartphone, just like Merriam-Webster likes it!).

I need help! Send in the ... (fill in the blank)

It's funny how issues come up in bunches, and then they disappear for a long time.  Recently, I've had three or four manuscripts with the same issue, one I haven't had for a few years.  So let's talk about Calvary vs. cavalry. They are spelled differently and one (Calvary) tends to be capitalized in most instances. But they continue to be confused.

Calvary:
There's the (mostly) religious definition:

as a place: place outside ancient Jerusalem where Jesus was crucified (or in Hebrew, Golgotha)

OR a cross with the figure of the crucified Christ typically flanked by two other crosses with figures of thieves and set out of doors as a shrine

It is also an experience of intense suffering; a trial or ordeal (which doesn't have to have the religious undertones).

Then there's cavalry. And when you're talking about getting help, or support, or reinforcements, this is what you are looking for.

This noun has several meanings:

1 a obsolete :  horsemanship <the art of cavalry> 
  b obsolete :  knighthood <the cavalry of the court> 
  c :  horsemen <a thousand cavalry in flight>

 

2 a (1) :  the component of an army that maneuvers and fights on horseback (2) :  a similar component that maneuvers on horseback but fights on foot 
  b :  the component of an army mounted on horseback or moving in motor vehicles and having combat missions (as reconnaissance and counterreconnaissance) that require great mobility 

And frankly, those two are the most familiar to me (and probably you, too).  But there's a third meaning, which I had never seen in use:
 

3:  deep chrome yellow. This is a moderate orange yellow that is redder and lighter than yellow ocher — called also cavalry, chrome yellow orange, medium chrome yellow, middle chrome yellow. And try as I might, I can't find a swatch online that identifies as cavalry. 

Have any of you used cavalry as a color? Inquiring minds want to know!

My Fairy Tale Has A Fairy-Tale Ending

Come closer, child, and hear the wondrous tale I have for you.

Okay, I don't have a tale.  But if you are looking for a list of fairy tales, Wikipedia has got you covered.  I was kind of surprised to see The Wonderful Wizard of Oz listed as a fairy tale but Jack and the Beanstalk and Little Red Riding Hood was more what I was expecting.

But today's blog post is about fairy tales.  Well, actually, it's about hyphenation, but fairy tales are more fun, right?



And it's Valentine's Day, so some of you curmudgeonly types may think love stories are fairy tales, but us die-hard romantics believe! But if you are looking for a new twist on the fairy tale, check these out:

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs

Rapunzel

Red Riding Hood

Sleeping Beauty

These are super fun fairy tales, very quick and with a bit of a bite. There are several more available and more planned.

Another series to follow the fairy tale format is Laurie LeClair's Once Upon A Romance series. The series starts with the three King sisters and their happy-ever-afters.

Fairy tale is a noun, by the way (remember, this post is about fairy tales writing editing hyphenation, so back to business!). Yes, nouns can sometimes be two words.  (And as a noun, it's two separate words.)  "Read me this fairy tale," says the little girl in her annoying singsong voice.  

When it's an adjective, it's hyphenated: Everyone wants their fairy-tale ending. 


That little hyphen does such a big job: it changes how a word should be used. Sometimes it goes from the noun form (fairy tale) to adjective (fairy-tale ending). Sometimes it goes from the noun form (a jump start) to the verb form (we had to jump-start the car). Sometimes it goes form the verb form (we lifted off) to the noun form (after lift-off, we enjoyed the ride). And when it's missing, sometimes our brains can get caught in trying to decipher what was meant: there's a difference between the man operated machines and the man-operated machines.


Welcome to the English language, where nothing is simple. 

And Happy Valentine's Day!

(I couldn't resist these geeky Valentine's cards, so enjoy!)

Nodding...Shrugging...Blinking

No, that's not me trying to stay awake. It's me wondering why extra body parts are involved in those actions. Okay, maybe not extra body parts, but extra words.


Take, for instance, nodding. 
Is there any other body part that nods besides your head?

Nope.  

Can you shrug anything but your shoulders? (That's not counting shrugging a coat on or shrugging a shirt off)

Leo's got a shrug AND a nod going on here...

Can you blink anything but your eyes?

In these cases, her/his/my head, her/his/my shoulders, and her/his/my eyes act as filler words.  They aren't (generally) necessary for the reader to know what is going on. Maybe I should call them killer words, because I'm going to kill those little darlings for you. (Well, if I'm copyediting.  If I'm proofreading, I will just suffer silently.)

Not Every Why is a Question

I can hear my grade school teacher's voice talking about the 5 W's: what, who, where, when, and why.  (And just for fun, there was the accompanying H: how.) And her voice tells me that those are all questions that need to be answered.

So, one might think that every time you use one of those in a sentence, you are actually asking a question...and questions need question marks, right? Wrong. Well, right, really, but there's always some sneaky things going on to make things confusing.

And that confusion almost always happens with wondering: I wonder why; she wondered when; he wondered who.

Let's play with some samples, shall we?

ORIGINAL: The cat curled up tighter on my lap. A steady purr filled the quiet of the room. Without warning, the cat jumped straight in the air and landed on my bare legs, claws out and tail all bushed up in fright. I wondered why he did that?

That last sentence has the wrong punctuation at the end. It should be a period. The subject of the sentence is I; the verb is wondered; the rest is a description of what was pondered. But overall, the sentence is a declarative sentence, not a question - so no question mark for you!

OPTION 1: The cat curled up tighter on my lap. A steady purr filled the quiet of the room. Without warning, the cat jumped straight in the air and landed on my bare legs, claws out and tail all bushed up in fright. Why did he do that?

With a quick change of wording, we now have an actual question: why did he do that? The reasoning to put it in italics is to indicate internal thought, so the I wondered is now implied; the reader will assume it's the narrator (or the character in the book) having this thought or internal conversation (I know I'm not the only one who talks to myself...admit it - you do, too!). 

OPTION 2: The cat curled up tighter on my lap. A steady purr filled the quiet of the room. Without warning, the cat jumped straight in the air and landed on my bare legs, claws out and tail all bushed up in fright. I wondered: Why did he do that? What would have caused such a reaction?

In this example, the use of I wondered and the colon gives the writer the opportunity to ask a series of questions...and real questions get question marks, so it's okay to use them in this type of structure. And each question starts with a capital letter (Chicago Manual of Style 6.61: When a colon introduces two or more sentences…the first word following it is capitalized.)



ORIGINAL: The dining room table was cleaned. Well, except for the two place settings, pillar candles, and the small vase of roses. She wondered when he had found time to get the flowers?

As in our first example, the noun (She) and verb (wondered) are easy to spot; the rest of the sentence is a description of what she wondered about. So the ending punctuation should simply be the period (period, no questions!).

But we could also modify it to become an actual question:

OPTION 1: The dining room table was cleaned. Well, except for the two place settings, pillar candles, and the small vase of roses. When he had found time to get the flowers?

Or create a statement:
OPTION 2: The dining room table was cleaned. Well, except for the two place settings, pillar candles, and the small vase of roses. He obviously found time to get the flowers.


ORIGINAL: He wondered who ate his apple pie?

In this very simple situation, it's the same as before: the noun (he) and verb (wondered) are easy to spot. And again, it should have a period at the end, not a question mark. If you want to keep that question mark (maybe you are emotionally attached to it...I make no judgements [well, maybe I do]), here are some options:

OPTION 1: Who ate my apple pie? Bob looked at Faith.  Surely she knew I wanted that last piece.

OPTION 2:  Someone ate his pie; he wondered who would have done such a thing.

(Yes, Faith would have eaten that last piece of apple pie--it's one of her vices! So stop wondering and stop using question marks when you don't need to!)

Taking A Stand...Against Standing

Now, I don't want to come across as militant, but I am ready to take a stand...against standing. Standing in doorways, in hallways, in rooms, and in front of me - I can't take all this standing.


Let's look at an example:

I turned around and saw him standing in the doorway.

Well, unless he is in a wheelchair, or for some reason he wouldn't be standing (maybe he's been hobbled like Paul Sheldon in Misery and he can only drag himself from place to place), why does a reader need to know he's standing? It'd be a miracle if he was wheelchair-bound and suddenly he stood in a doorway.  That's important information in that instance.  But just a guy in a doorway? What else would he be doing besides standing?

Okay, maybe he's leaning against the doorframe.  Maybe with a smile on his face I can't resist.  Or maybe he's crouched slightly, gun in hand and ready to shoot me (or maybe the guy who's holding me hostage - yeah, that's better).

I turned around. He leaned against the doorframe, a smile on his face.  Not just a smile, but that smile.  The one that got me every time.

or

I turned around. I barely had enough time to register the crouched form of a man before I saw the gun come up and heard the kidnapper fall to the ground.

See? No standing needed.

Give me some action!

To Use Italics or To Not Use Italics - That Is the Question

Well, it's not really a question...but I am starting to question why some authors are so in love with italics.  Specifically, italics for trademarked names or company names.

A few years ago, I downloaded a free book from Amazon.  The book wasn't particularly good (in fact, it may one of my Top Five Worst Books Ever) but the thing that struck me the most was the constant, overwhelming use of italics AND the constant, overwhelming overuse of company and trademarked names.  It went something like:

The UPS truck dropped off the box from Macy's.  The Tommy Hilfilger shirts had been on backorder; she'd almost thought about canceling the order and re-ordering something from Brooks Brothers.  She sipped her Pepsi and picked up the keys to her Mercedes.  It was time to head out to Saks Fifth Avenue and find the perfect pair of Louboutins.

And I recently read a really intriguing book.  I'd never read something with this particular premise and it really took me by surprise.  I truly felt invested in the characters and the author used character motivation in a way I'd never read before.  But...and this is a big but...every time there was a purchase, a mention of a brand name - it was in those dang italics!! I could overlook the occasional typo or missing punctuation, but every time I saw those italics, I practically shuddered in response. (If you are interested in the specific book, let me know and I'll email it to you.  I haven't contacted the author to ask why she has it like that, and I wouldn't want to put the title out there without having talked to the author first.  And maybe she's corrected the manuscript since I downloaded my copy.)

So, here are some guidelines from the Chicago Manual of Style (16th Edition) in case you are wavering on what to do:

7.47  Italics for emphasis

Use italics for emphasis only as an occasional adjunct to efficient sentence structure. Overused, italics quickly lose their force. Seldom should as much as a sentence be italicized for emphasis, and never a whole passage. In the first example below, the last three words, though clearly emphatic, do not require italics because of their dramatic position at the end of the sentence.

The damaging evidence was offered not by the arresting officer, not by the injured plaintiff, but by the boy’s own mother.

On the other hand, the emphasis in the following example depends on the italics:

It was Leo! 

7.49  Italics for unfamiliar foreign words and phrases

Italics are used for isolated words and phrases in a foreign language if they are likely to be unfamiliar to readers. If a foreign word becomes familiar through repeated use throughout a work, it need be italicized only on its first occurrence. If it appears only rarely, however, italics may be retained.

The grève du zèle is not a true strike but a nitpicking obeying of work rules.

Honi soit qui mal y pense is the motto of the Order of the Garter.

8.152  Trademarks

Brand names that are trademarks—often so indicated in dictionaries—should be capitalized if they must be used. A better choice is to substitute a generic term when available.

Since You've Been Gone

Okay, that post title maybe could be read as "Since I've Been Gone" considering it's been so long since I've actually posted on a regular basis.  But I've been busy working (to which the hubby can attest) with occasional breaks for playing hard:

I went ziplining! (Back when there was greenery!)

Road trip to Denver included a visit to Casa Bonita

So that's my excuse...

I wanted to share something but first we have to talk about this meme that's made its way around not too long ago:

{And I've just spent thirty minutes looking and it's nowhere to be found}
{After a few days, I decided to try to find it a different way.  Time spent looking: five minutes.  Geesh!}

Here's a writing exercise: write a scene revolving around the sentence, “She told him that she loved him,” adding the word “only” before different words. You can check out some of these posts to see one author's take on the exercise (here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).

Let's do the same exercise with since and because.  In my copyediting, I tend to suggest because over since when there's a relational thing going on: because this, that happened.  I suggest since is better used as a notion of time passing: since then, this happened.  I know that in speech, we are less apt to use the words that way, but there are plenty of instances in the exposition where the change is a good thing. So, on to the exercise: this time we'll switch out the since for because and see how the sentence changes meaning. 

Since you've been gone, I read all the time.
Because you've been gone, I read all the time.

Since you've been gone, we've had a party.
Because you've been gone, we've had a party.

Since you've been gone, I've never felt better.
Because you've been gone, I've never felt better.

Or, to borrow Kelly Clarkson's words:
But since you've been gone, I can breathe for the first time


But because you've been gone, I can breathe for the first time

Alright, readers: got any more good ones to share?

Can You Trust Your Ears?

When I was  kid (eons and eons ago), I sang along to the radio.  Of course, most of the time I had no idea what any of those words actually meant.  I still cringe when I think of my parents listening to me belt out (off-key and way out of tune) lyrics that no six-year-old should be singing ("Ruby, don't take your love to town" and "Lay you down and softly whisper pretty love words in your ear, Lay you down and tell you all the things a woman loves to hear." Bonus points if you know the song/artist.  I'll give you a hint: my parents liked country songs.)

My favorite one was from when I was a bit older and started listening to my brothers' rock and roll stuff.  Bruce Springsteen's "Blinded by the Light" was just chock full of stuff I didn't understand, but what got me (and apparently a whole bunch of people) was the line "cut loose like a deuce," which I (and countless others) heard as "wrapped up like a douche."  And of course, I had no idea what that meant.  So I can only imagine the pleasure everyone who heard me sing got from that one.  My only consolation now is that I clearly wasn't the only one.

(And just for some more fun, run down this rabbit hole: Am I Right - Misheard Song Lyrics)

So it shouldn't be any surprise to me when I come across those auditory errors when I proof manuscripts.  Some common ones include:

for intensive purposes  - should be for all intents and purposes
phase - should be faze
hone in - should be home in
you've got another thing coming - should be you've got another think coming **

**Part of the confusion on this one rests on the shoulders of Judas Priest (as if they didn't get enough grief in 1989 when they were named defendants in a lawsuit over subliminal messages in their albums that caused two young men to commit suicide).  The song "You've Got Another Thing Coming" was a big hit in 1982 and from then on, we can blame them for the auditory error and the misuse of the phrase as it was intended.

But I ran across this really cool video that describes how what you see can affect what you hear, and what you hear can change your perceived vision.  Check it out:

Looking to Alter the Altar

Today's confusing word choice: alter vs. altar

An altar is a table or place which serves as a center of worship or ritual — often used with the to refer to the act of getting married.  Here's the altar at my little church at Christmas:

Sometimes people will talk about it a bit more figuratively:

A raised structure (such as a block, pile of blocks, pillar, or stand) on which sacrifices are offered or incense burned (as in the worship of a deity or of the spirit of a deceased ancestor) — often used figuratively to describe a thing given great or undue precedence or value especially at the cost of something else <He sacrificed his family life on the altar of career advancement.>


But when you use alter, you are performing an action - to cause to become different in some particular characteristic (as measure, dimension, course, arrangement, or inclination) without changing into something else  OR to become different in some respect :  undergo change usually without resulting difference in essential nature.

So if you want to see what happens when you alter an altar, here you go: 

The Tension I'm Feeling is Palpable and I'm Looking Forward to a Palatable Meal

Let's review:

 PALPABLE

 

And trust me when I say that searching images for this word can be a bit Not Safe For Work (or your delicate stomach).  Palpable is also something doctors talk about - as in, palpable tumors or bumps or cysts.  So I don't recommend looking too much at those pictures!

 PALATABLE

Here's a picture I swiped from my hubby's Facebook page (thanks, honey!) of a meal he was eager to dig in to.  I don't particularly find sushi palatable, but hey, he likes it...and so do plenty of other people.

When you are describing something yummy, delicious, or that will go down easy, PALATABLE is the way to go (think table, where you'd sit for some of that deliciousness.)

When you are describing something you can feel (either in reality or perception), PALPABLE is the way to go.  It's a cliche, but most often I see it used as the tension in the air was palpable.

Cause of the Month, 'Cause You Care

You've all seen it: every month there seems to be some big cause to support.  

We just survived October, the pinkest month of them all, in honor of breast cancer awareness month.  It was also National Down Syndrome Awareness month, Healthy Lung month, and National Dental Hygiene month (no, my dentist didn't pay me for that plug!).  

In November, it's Pancreatic Cancer Awareness month, National Alzheimer's Awareness month, and possibly my son's favorite, Manvember (From the Urban Dictionary: A dedicated month during the year, specifically November, when manliness is at its peak. During this time there will be no shaving, except for the head...because that is manly. Flannel shirts will be worn as frequently as possible, tobacco products will be on hand at all times, and meat will be consumed at least twice a day.).

Now, all of those are great causes (well, except maybe Manvember...that might be taking it too far).  But this is a proofing blog, so perhaps you are wondering what this is all about.  Let me tell you, 'cause I'd like nothing better...

Cause - noun: a reason or motive for an action or condition 
Cause - transitive verb: to serve as cause or occasion of :  bring into existence or  to effect by command, authority, or force

'Cause - a contraction of because (conjunction).  for the reason that :  on account of the cause that — used to introduce dependent clauses 

The difference, dear reader, is that little punctuation mark - the apostrophe. Such a little thing that wields such power to change a word from a noun to a conjunction - amazing, isn't it? The apostrophe is misunderstood, abused, and ignored...but it still is a powerful weapon. The Chicago Manual of Style tells us in 6.113 that the apostrophe has three main uses: 

1. to indicate the possessive case

1. to stand in for missing letters or numerals 

1. to form the plural of certain expressions    

It's the use of the apostrophe to stand in for missing letters or words that you have to remember when you use words like 'cause for because, 'cept for except, and so on. 

My vice is not a vise

Can you guess which one is my vice and which one is my vise?

This is an apple pie. This is delicious.  This is my vice.

This is a vise.  It is not delicious. This is technically my husband's vise, because I bought it as a Christmas present for him. 

This is what is left of my vice (apple pie) after two days, home alone with no one else to steal my pie. (And my family can attest that there was even less in the pie plate when they came home at the end of the week.)

I Have Spoken

One of the basic dialogue tags is said (he said, she said, they said). Now, some people are of the opinion that the most evil thing you can do is overuse said (here, here).  But others are equally adamant that said is the best way to write dialogue (here, here, here, and here).

You might be tempted to use an alternatives to said and pick spoke.  This would seem to make sense: they both refer to using one's vocal cords to impart sound.  It's talking, right? But it's not a blanket alternative. 

Let's use an example.  I'm not a writer by profession, so bear with my examples (this is what my brain thinks about at three thirty in the morning and I'm wide awake).

Option 1:

He said, "I am not going to eat that slop."
"It's not for you anyways," she said, trying to hide the hurt in her voice.  "Melvin is coming over for dinner."
"Poor fool," he said under his breath.

Here is what we'll call the traditional method of writing dialogue.  Simple and easy to follow.  Note the punctuation: comma before the opening quotation mark in Sentence 1; comma between the end of the spoken words and ending quotation mark in Sentence 2 and Sentence 3.

Option 2:
He spoke, "I am not going to eat that slop."
"It's not for you anyways," she spoke, trying to hide the hurt in her voice.  "Melvin is coming over for dinner."
"Poor fool," he spoke under his breath.

This is the same as Option 1, but I replaced said with spoke (no punctuation changes). This is incorrect and should NOT be in your manuscript.

Option 3:
He spoke slowly, sending bullets to her heart with each word.  "I am not going to eat that slop."
"It's not for you anyways." She spoke defiantly, trying to hide the hurt in her voice.  "Melvin is coming over for dinner."
"Poor fool." He spoke under his breath to avoid any more hysterics.

Notice that in Option 3, spoke isn't involved in the actual dialogue.  It's part of a dialogue beat, not a dialogue tag. And the punctuation has changed as well, because spoke is in its own sentence.

Looking in the dictionary, the word say has a past tense of said, a past participle of said, a present participle of saying, a present first singular of say, a present second singular of say, and a third singular of says. Nowhere does it list spoke as a part of say's tenses.

And likewise, in looking at speak, it lists spoke, spoken, speaking, and speaks.  Nowhere does it list say as part of speak's tenses.

So please, be careful how you use spoke in your manuscripts.

I have spoken.

Everybody Gets Their Own

As a kid, I'm sure I'm not the only one to say: It's mine!  Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!

But there are times you have to share, even when you don't want to.  Sometimes, it's your parent making you share with your siblings.  Or your teacher making you share the glitter with your art partner.  Or at the playground, everyone has to take their turn down the slide.

But there are times, oh-so-special times, when you get everything to yourself.  Maybe your older brother isn't home, so he doesn't get any pie. But you do.  Or maybe your teacher has enough supplies that you can create the most awesome, spectacular rainbow of glitter that ever graced a refrigerator door.  Or maybe no one is at the park, and you can slide down that slide time after time without interruption or waiting in line.

But what does this have to do with writing, you ask.  Well, let me tell you:

Every person speaking or acting gets their own sentences and most of the time, they get their own paragraphs, too!  It's how readers keep track of who's talking or who's doing something.

Let's take this example:
Wrapping his arms around her, she snuggled in closer.  

Here you have 1) a guy wrapping his arms around a woman and 2) a woman snuggling in closer.  These are two separate actions by two separate people.

The better sentence construction is:
He wrapped his arms around her; she snuggled in closer.

Using the semi-colon and adding a subject (He, in this case) gives the reader a clearer understanding of what is going on.  Remember that each side of the semi-colon is a complete sentence (subject + verb).

You could separate the sentences like this:
He wrapped his arms around her.  She snuggled in closer. 

But because these sentences are so close in action/reaction, it's perfectly acceptable to use a semi-colon.

(Not that I'm pushing the use of semi-colons, but hey, that's what they are there for!)

Most of the time, though, you'll have a paragraph with each separate characters actions and dialogue.  Let's keep using that earlier example:

He wrapped his arms around her.  He thought he would never get enough of holding her like this, and kept his eyes closed, inhaling her scent.  He felt her snuggle in, as if she, too, could not bear to be out of his arms.  

She sighed, knowing that she shouldn't cling to him.  But...he was there and she needed his strength to get through the next hour.  Just a little bit longer, she told herself.  Then she would let him go.

See how easy it is to know who is doing the thinking in each paragraph?


So if your characters are "sharing," be sure to make sure your reader can tell who is doing or saying it. But don't be shy about having your characters be selfish and have sentences or paragraphs of their own. 

The Long and Short of It

No, I’m not going to make short people jokes (I’m sensitive that way!).  Let’s make some hyphen jokes instead. 

Umm…I can’t think of any hyphen jokes.

Okay, instead let’s talk about the difference between a dash, en dash, and em dash. (And have you even ever heard of a 2-em dash or a 3-em dash?)  Turning your trusty copy of the Chicago Manual of Style to section 6.75, you see the following:

Hyphens and dashes compared

Hyphens and the various dashes all have their specific appearance (shown below) and uses (discussed in the following paragraphs). The hyphen, the en dash, and the em dash are the most commonly used. Though many readers may not notice the difference—especially between an en dash and a hyphen—correct use of the different types is a sign of editorial precision and care. (And hey, I'm all about editorial precision and care!)

hyphen -

en dash –

em dash —

2-em dash ——

3-em dash ———

A hyphen is used in compound words and names and in word division. A hyphen is used to separate numbers that are not inclusive, such as telephone numbers, social security numbers, and ISBNs. It is also used to separate letters when a word is spelled out letter by letter, in dialogue, in reference to American Sign Language, and elsewhere. Hyphens can also appear in URLs and e-mail addresses. A hyphen must not be added to such a string when it breaks at the end of a line.

The principal use of the en dash is to connect numbers and, less often, words. With continuing numbers—such as dates, times, and page numbers—it signifies up to and including (or through). For the sake of parallel construction, the word to, never the en dash, should be used if the word from precedes the first element in such a pair; similarly, and, never the en dash, should be used if between precedes the first element. In other contexts, such as with scores and directions, the en dash signifies, more simply, to.  An en dash may be used to indicate a number range that is ongoing—for example, to indicate the dates of a serial publication or to give the birth date of a living person. No space intervenes between the en dash and the mark of punctuation that follows. The en dash can be used in place of a hyphen in a compound adjective when one of its elements consists of an open compound or when both elements consist of hyphenated compounds. This editorial nicety may go unnoticed by the majority of readers; nonetheless, it is intended to signal a more comprehensive link than a hyphen would. It should be used sparingly, and only when a more elegant solution is unavailable. The en dash is sometimes used as a minus sign, but minus signs and en dashes are distinct characters (defined by the Unicode standard as U+2212 and U+2013, respectively). Both the characters themselves and the spacing around them may differ; moreover, substituting any character for another may hinder searches in electronic publications. Thus it is best to use the correct character, especially in mathematical copy.

The em dash, often simply called the dash, is the most commonly used and most versatile of the dashes. Em dashes are used to set off an amplifying or explanatory element and in that sense can function as an alternative to parentheses, commas , or a colon —especially when an abrupt break in thought is called for. An em dash is occasionally used to set off an introductory noun, or a series of nouns, from a pronoun that introduces the main clause. An em dash or a pair of em dashes may indicate a sudden break in thought or sentence structure or an interruption in dialogue. (Where a faltering rather than sudden break is intended, suspension points may be used.) An em dash may be used before expressions such as that is or namely. In modern usage, if the context calls for an em dash where a comma would ordinarily separate a dependent clause from an independent clause, the comma is omitted. Likewise, if an em dash is used at the end of quoted material to indicate an interruption, the comma can be safely omitted before the words that identify the speaker. In modern usage, a question mark or an exclamation point—but never a comma, a colon, or a semicolon, and rarely a period—may precede an em dash.

A 2-em dash represents a missing word or part of a word, either omitted to disguise a name (or occasionally an expletive) or else missing from or illegible in quoted or reprinted material. When a whole word is missing, space appears on both sides of the dash. When only part of a word is missing, no space appears between the dash and the existing part (or parts) of the word; when the dash represents the end of a word, a space follows it (unless a period or other punctuation immediately follows). Although a 2-em dash sometimes represents material to be supplied, it should not be confused with a blank line to be filled in; a blank in a form should appear as an underscore (e.g., ____).

In a bibliography, a 3-em dash followed by a period represents the same author or editor named in the preceding entry.

When I'm proofing a manuscript, I often find myself fixing hyphens to em dashes.  I do this by using the alt code for it.  Simply put, I hold down the Alt key and type 0151 while that Alt key is still held down.  This way, I know for sure the author will have a true em dash, not just what looks like a em dash. 

And I have to say, I love the versatility of the em dash.  When one character interrupts another-time for an em dash.  When a character's dialogue is stopped short by something they see-time for an em dash.  When it's time for an appositive-you know, something too good to leave out-time for an em dash. 

And to reward you for reading this entire post, here's a little something that made me smile.  Of course, I'm just twisted that way.

Want to learn more exciting rules for punctuation? Check out the Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition.  Or, you know, hire a freelance proofreader like me AND I'll look up all the rules!

It's a Family Trait

When I was little, I lived across the street from my grandparents.

Me and Grandma. Yes, I still have those chipmunk cheeks!

I would spend each Saturday with them, rotating between grocery shopping one week with Grandma and going on Grandpa's mail route the next (it totally rocked being "Charlie's granddaughter" - I got to play in the mail bins and get soda and candy from vending machines).  I would also spend time there when I was bored at home.  They had so much stuff - games, toys, and fascinating odds and ends - that I could spend a week there and find something different to look at or explore every day!

After my grandmother passed away, my parents and aunts and uncles (my grandparents had five kids) started to clean out the house.  I suppose they did it to make things easier for my grandfather, but I'm not really sure it did that.  But what it did do is open my eyes to a family trait: hoarding.  Now, to be fair, my grandparents were of the Great Depression era, so they never wanted to throw anything away.  That aluminum pie tin - keep.  That tin foil that was falling apart - keep.  That plastic top to a jar you couldn't find - keep.  Newspapers from last month - keep.  Pencils too short to hold on to: keep.  Pens that didn't work: keep.

And there was an accessory to the hoarding: stacking.  My grandmother was a stacker.  There were piles of things everywhere.  Not a clear surface in sight: Newspapers.  Bills. Catalogs. Receipts. Drawings from grandchildren.  You know - treasures.

But family treasures are not really what I wanted to talk about today.  It's the hoards of family treasures as opposed to the hordes of family.  So let's look at hoards and hordes:

Hoard: collection or accumulation or amassment of something usually of special value or utility that is put aside for preservation of safekeeping or future use often in a greedy or miserly or otherwise unreasonable manner and that is often kept hidden or as if hidden; a supply or stock or fund of something that is stored up and closely and often jealously guarded <a hoard of money> <a hoard of provisions> <a hoard of facts> often : treasure <dug up a hoard of gold and jewels> <a hoard of old coins>

Horde: an unorganized or loosely organized mass of individuals : a vast number : crowd, swarm, agglomeration <circling hordes of mixed insects — B.J.Haimes> <unpolluted … by their brief contact with the touristic horde — Arnold Bennett> <hordes of Irish … came to the American shore — American Guide Series: New York> <most companies today take hordes of pictures — W.B.Eidson>

Maybe the easiest way to remember the difference is to think of the e in horde with the e in people.   After all, you don't want to hoard people, do you?



 

Tools of the Trade: The Well-Spoken Thesaurus

One of the books I have on my work desk is The Well-Spoken Thesaurus.  It's a great way to think outside of your normal patterns and give your manuscript a bit of flair.

It's not a typical thesaurus where you look up the word and you get a litany of words to substitute.  It includes phrasing, which can be just as important as not repeating the same words over and over.

One example:
His ___ were like a ____
His ____ were the____ of a ___
Example: The skin of his wrinkled brown face had a dry and scaly look; his hands were the hands of a crocodile.  His movements were marked by the lizard's disconcertingly abrupt clockwork speed; his speech was thin, fluty, and dry.  (Aldous Huxley, Chrome Yellow)

See how more you as the reader get from "his hands were the hands of a crocodile" as opposed to "his hands were like a crocodile's" (which is better than "his hands were dry and scaly").

Another example:
Persuade - prevail upon, strike a sympathetic chord, or cajole
Persuade not to - dissuade
Persuade to speak - draw him out
Persuaded me to - moved me to 

And possibly a more useful example:
Said - expressed, indicated, remarked, made clear that, said with a touch of, issued a statement, said with a quiver of, implored, broke into the conversation, gave full expression to, an irreverent voice put in, put it to her, articulated, dropped her voice mournfully, she went on, she went off into a, as murmurs seeped through the pews, declared, drawled out the word, couched in terms of, put it to him squarely, addressed some remark to him.