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!

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!)

Pass the Eggcorn, Please!

Yum...eggcorns.  I love'em - don't you? Oh wait, do you even know what an eggcorn is?

When an egg meets that special acorn it's been waiting for (oops...I've been reading too many romances lately - sorry about that!).  Actually, it's a word or phrase that sounds like and is mistakenly used in a seemingly logical or plausible way for another word or phrase either on its own or as part of a set expression.  Maybe you've seen my previous posts (here and here), but eggcorns continue to fascinate me.

There's the list on Wikipedia you can look at (I've seen for all intensive purposes instead of for all intents and purposes but I have yet to see on the spurt of the moment instead of on the spur of the moment - thank goodness!). But it's rather short.

For more fun with eggcorns, you can check out the Eggcorn Database.

Apparently 2015 was the year of the eggcorn, because that's the year Merriam-Webster added it to its dictionary and everyone was writing about it: NPR asked their listeners to submit their favorite eggcorns and settled on the top 100 .

And Time magazine's contribution on the subject mentioned one of my favorites: the you've got another thing coming taking the place of you've got another think coming. (That one is actually on my style sheet setup, I've seen it so often!)

So what eggcorns have you served up lately? Or which ones have you come across on the wild, wild Web?

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!

Don't Hold Your Breath

So 2014 is officially over (yes, I waited a few days just to make sure!).  So now I can tell you what the secret phrase of 2014 is:

[[drum roll, please...]]

The secret phrase is: held my/his/her breath (especially if the person didn't realize they were holding their breath!).

As I reported earlier, it was one of those things you'd feel like you'd seen everywhere, but when actually tallied up, there were only twenty-two instances. (Considering the number of manuscripts I looked at in 2014, that's not too many instances.)

In tie for third place:

In one title by Author 3A, it's used twice: I let out the breath I didn’t realize I’d been holding and I let out the breath I’d been holding.

In two titles by Author 3B, we have: She hadn’t realized she’d been holding her breath again and She let out the breath she didn’t know she’d been holding.

In second place, Author 2 used it three times in three separate titles: She let out a breath she hadn’t realized she’d been holding and Hearing those words, he let out the breath he didn’t know he’d been holding and He let out a breath he hadn’t realized he was holding, and pulled her into his arms.

And in first place, Author 1 had two titles: one used the phrase just once, but the other used it a record three times: {book number one} He let out the breath he was holding when the door closed behind her and {book number two} She let out the breath she was holding and She let out the breath she didn’t realize she was holding and She let out the breath she was holding.

And for first place, Author 1 will receive...a $25 credit on the next manuscript.  So see - sometimes it pays to be a winner in my silly little contests!

Now to dream up a new contest for 2015...

I'm So Green

Okay, I'm not really green.  But I was trying to think of something to prove my point.  But before I get to my point, here's what led me to my point:

The entry in Merriam-Webster:
Nonplus (also nonplused; nonplussed also nonplused; nonplussing also nonplusing; nonplusses also nonpluses)
:  to cause to be at a loss as to what to say, think, or do 
:  reduce to a state of total incapacity to act or decide :  perplex, baffle, stump
<this turn of events nonplusses me — J. R. Perkins> 
 <nonplussed by the disclosure — Newsweek>  
<for a moment the girl was nonplussed — A. R. Williams>

What really gets me is how the examples give absolutely NO help in reinforcing the meaning of the word.  It's like I tell you I'm so green without you having any idea what green is.  

Unless, of course, you are this guy.  Then I totally know what you mean by green:

So, anyway, back to my point.  My point is nonplussed is one of those words that might be misused because there might not be good context for the reader (or the writer!) to know what is really meant.  I recently came across this exact scenario in a manuscript and I asked the author if nonplussed (at a loss as to what to say, think, or do) was really the word they meant to use because I could see the character reacting a different way.

I've had instances where an author used a word and I was sure the word shouldn't be used that way.  But when I looked it up, there it was: some fourth or fifth (or sixth or seventh) definition that allowed for that particular word to be used the way the author intended.  And I learned a new way to use an old word.  

Guess those dictionaries (and those editors!) are handy, huh?

 

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?

Something You Ought To Know

Gather around, children, for today's lesson.  It's something you ought to know about aught.

Once upon a time, a long, long time ago, there was the turn of the century.  Amazing things happened:

1900: Kodak Introduces $1 Brownie Cameras: The Brownie camera was the first hand-held camera that was cheap enough and simple enough for even children to use, making photography accessible to the masses. (Now we take pictures with our phones...it's so simple even a child can do it. And in return, the masses have given us photographic proof of the weirdness of people )

1901: First Nobel Prizes Awarded: A pacifist at heart and an inventor by nature, Swedish chemist Alfred Nobel was the inventor of dynamite. Not wanting to go down in history for creating such a deadly device, Nobel created a will that left the bulk of his fortune to the establishment of five prizes (physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature, and peace). On December 10, 1901, five years after Alfred Nobel's death, the first five Nobel Prizes were awarded. (No relation to the Darwin Awards, but still kind of important.)

1902: The Teddy Bear Is Introduced. (I couldn't imagine my life without my teddy bear.)

1903: Produced by Thomas Edison but directed and filmed by Edison Company employee Edwin S. Porter, the 12-minute-long silent film, The Great Train Robbery (1903), was the first narrative movie, one that told a story. The Great Train Robbery's popularity led directly to the opening up of permanent movie theaters and the possibility of a future film industry. (And that masterpiece led to such gems as Showgirls and Sex Lives of the Potato Men - and I'm happy to say I've avoided watching at least one of those.)

1904:  New York City Subway Opens (the city wouldn't be the same without it, would it?)

1905: Freud Publishes His Theory of Sexuality (I ain't touching that one with a ten-foot pole.)

1906: Kellogg's Starts Selling Corn Flakes (ever see The Road to Wellville?)

1907: First Electric Washing Machine (thank goodness we don't have to take the wash down to the river anymore!)

1908: Three Year-Old Pu Yi Becomes Emperor of China (proving that not only does a toddler rule the home, he can rule a country).

1909: Plastic Is Invented (and where would we be without plastic? I mean credit cards, of course.)



But something else happened, too.  It wasn't the 1880s or the 1890s anymore.  It was the 1900s now.  So a new word was needed to talk about the decade.  Okay, maybe not a new word (it's been around since 1821 at least), but one that probably didn't get used too often: aught. The aughts, plural :  the ten year period from 2000 through 2009, 1900 through 1909, etc. (Surprisingly enough, there are six other definitions for aught.)  

And now that we've gone through our own turn of the century, we get to revive the use of aught when we talk about those years between 2000 and 2009.  Can't you just hear some old-timey voice saying, "Back in aught eight, I danced in Beyonce's video for 'Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It),' so I know how to dance, you pipsqueak."

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:

Toein' the Company Line

Back in my former life, I worked in a marketing department.  One of my duties was to update this binder with marketing procedures.  I never quite appreciated one of those marketing procedures until I started proofreading for a living: the corporate branding procedures.  (And I still flash back to the knowledge that PMS 312 is the correct color for the logo!)

But now, I have a deep appreciation for those branding procedures.  It's the way companies make sure they are represented the way they want to be out there in the world, whether it's in an ad, a blog, or in a book.

And so, dear reader and author, please remember when writing: there is a real reason to make sure those product names are correct in a manuscript.  For some reason, Apple products seem to trip up a lot of people.  The way they name their products is pretty consistent, but I've seen the names mangled up in some very interesting ways (often in the same manuscript). 

From the Apple Trademark website:
iPhone, iPad,or iPod, always typeset iPhone, iPad, or iPod with a lowercase i and an  uppercase P followed by lowercase letters. For iPod touch, always set touch with a  lowercase t. The name iPhone, iPad, or iPod should start with a lowercase i even when it is the first word in a sentence, paragraph, or title. Never set Mac in all capital letters. Use an uppercase M followed by lowercase letters.

And Twitter has some guidelines, and Google (they are really not fond of their name being used as a verb), and Microsoft, and the Boy Scouts, and Best Buy, and Walmart, and...well, you get the idea. So, it's time to toe the company line and make sure you use those names the right way.

Maybe I Need A Dictionary

So, any longtime followers of this blog (and thanks for keeping me on your list of blogs to read!) may have noticed a slight downturn in blog posts.

According to the dictionary, slight means to a small degree. Hmmm, maybe I need to re-think that sentence.  

Okay, there may have been a standstill (cessation of movement forward or backward, state of rest, stop) in my blog posting. 

And the newsletter - oh, that poor, poor newsletter.  I think I have to change it from "a monthly" newsletter to "a whenever I can manage to get it done" newsletter.  Or a "whenever I can get some interesting, time-worthy, and inspirational information" newsletter.  

Maybe I really should consult that dictionary before I do too much more damage to the English language!  

All that aside, my lack of getting these things done has been bothering me.  I will be trying to post more often, but I want to make sure that what I post has some value, isn't just fluff or a bunch of hooey.  I'm thinking of working out a schedule, or a list of possible topics (that appeals to the organized side of my brain) but when it comes time to put those ideas down on paper, they seem to disappear like wisps of wind that I can't catch.  And I'm working on some author interview requests, so hopefully you'll be hearing from some great authors, too.  

So, dear readers, do you have any topics you want more information on?  Something you'd like to know about in the grammar/editing world?  Drop me a line and maybe it'll be featured as a blog post/newsletter item!

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.

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?