Writing properly in English

[arcthemonkey]

Bad example:
I'll have a cheeseburger, small fries and a medium milkshake.

I would like to argue that this is perfectly correct. You don't need to put a comma before the 'and.' It's best to do it though, or you might confuzzle folks. Some argue that the comma is akin to an apostrophe, taking the place of the word 'and.' By this logic saying blah, blah, and blah would be like saying blah and blah and and blah.

And I will continue to use elipses to denote pauses in dialogue. You can't stop me.

 

[Wings]

I would like to argue that this is perfectly correct. You don't need to put a comma before the 'and.' It's best to do it though, or you might confuzzle folks. Some argue that the comma is akin to an apostrophe, taking the place of the word 'and.' By this logic saying blah, blah, and blah would be like saying blah and blah and and blah.

And I will continue to use elipses to denote pauses in dialogue. You can't stop me.

Yes it is perfectly acceptable. As a matter of fact when I first started learning English by use of commas and how to break up sentences...that is exactly how I was taught.

"Sherry gathered blueberries, raspberries and bananas" <<< The way I was taught.

"Sherry gather blueberries, raspberries, and bananas" <<< Foreign to me.

 

[Anonymous]

I learned both ways were correct, but the comma before the and is prefered. According to my Prentice Hall 4th Edition Grammar and Usage Guide (that book most people use for their required writing courses in college), this is the correct way to do it.

 

[Ellie]

The way I was taught it is this:

If it is simply three objects, you would put:
I have a pet cat, dog and mouse.

If you have plurals of objects it is:
I have some pet cats, dogs, and mice.

But that's just how I was taught.

 

[BlackStaticWolf]

My Elements of Style says that both ways of listing objects are correct. So do both my Legal Research and Writing textbook and my 18th edition The Bluebook (a book that I bet good money none of you have heard of).

So that one is up to the individual.

On ellipses:
The traditional usage has nothing to do with spoken dialogue at all. However, they are commonly used in creative writing to denote verbal pauses in dialogue that a comma simply does not simulate. In other words, a non-grammatical pause. For example:

"You… cold… bastard."

Reading that sentence aloud you can see that the speaker pauses between each word. To me it reads as a drawn out pause that gives the impression of shock or disbelief in this particular instance. Commas can also denote verbal pauses, but replace the ellipses with commas and see what happens:

"You, cold, bastard."

It just looks wrong. It's simply the wrong type of pause, not to mention the obvious butchery of grammar that seems to reach out and poke me in the eye Three Stooges-style. Now replace them with periods:

"You. Cold. Bastard."

That looks right, but to me it gives a different sort of pause from the ellipses. What I hear when reading this aloud is anger. I hear the character biting off the end of each word abruptly while he tries to control his rage.

They're also frequently used at the end of a character's sentence to imply that they're letting their words trail off. A plain old period doesn't do this, and a comma certainly doesn't either. Without narrative to convey the verbal action, the author needs to use something else to get the point across. Ellipses are a rather widely accepted way of doing this amongst writers.

I say that neither usage is improper. Dialogue does not need to be entirely grammatically correct, but rather simulate the spoken word. If the best way to do that is with an ellipsis, then that's what you should use.

What you should not do is use an ellipsis in place of a comma... which is something I see writers in games, amateur fiction, and forums do all the time.

See? I just did it. :P

 

[arcthemonkey]

Haha, I work for a lawyer and there is a "The bluebook" on the bookshelf in the office.

 

[kintaruo]

Back to listing things, the AP style of writing, which is the newspaper group, says no comma before the and. So when writing a newspaper story, the AP will do blah, blah and blah. Every time. So it's really just up to the person I guess, or the style of writing.

Another thing, there are different ways to write. The "proper" way every time will get boring. That's just the way it is. You can write like this: I did this and this and this. In fact, that's one of the sentence structures we learned in AP english in 12th grade, with my psycho grammar nazi teacher.

Also, colloquial writing is generally better than "proper" writing, unless of course you are writing a paper, in which case proper always wins. But if you're writing a story, it's almost better to write "accepted" english, because that's how people talk, and that's how they'd probably like to read.

 

[Anonymous]

Also, colloquial writing is generally better than "proper" writing, unless of course you are writing a paper, in which case proper always wins. But if you're writing a story, it's almost better to write "accepted" english, because that's how people talk, and that's how they'd probably like to read.

Not really. Although I've seen stuff slip past editors, generally the only time you want to use accepted English and not proper English is when you are writing dialog. Not doing so looks very unprofessional, unless, of course, it is accepted English that is on the verge of becomming an accepted and official part of the language (like the discontinuation of the word whom).

 

[BlackStaticWolf]

Haha, I work for a lawyer and there is a "The bluebook" on the bookshelf in the office.

Hehe... there'd better be. If you worked for a lawyer who DIDN'T have one, I'd be worried. :P

 

[kintaruo]

Hmm. Yeah Lene, you're right. I'm not sure what I was thinking late last night :lol: . I didn't mean like, write poorly though. I sort of meant stuff like the whom thing you were talking about. I think? Heh. But everything else I wrote I meant. ':|

 

[Sailor Taurus]

Since when does "Jesus's cross was heavy." sound right? >_>

I concur, there is a mistake in that section.

Charles's should infact be Charles', as every word in this case that ends with an S should only have an apostraphe added to the end, not an apostraphe S (such a tactic is focused on, along with other grammar corrections, in the last year of British Primary school).
So in fact, "Jesus' cross was heavy." is in fact correct, and the "Charles's" quote is incorrect. At least, that is what I have been taught in every single English class I have attended, plus Official QVC English GCSE Textbooks.

 

[lorddonk]

This is great!! I hope a lot of people read this. (As embarassing as it is to say I never knew there was a difference for "its" and "it's". I would always use them interchangeably... Anyway, nice guide!! *runs away while being mauled by angry English teacher*

 

[DrakoShade]

I concur, there is a mistake in that section.

Charles's should infact be Charles', as every word in this case that ends with an S should only have an apostraphe added to the end, not an apostraphe S (such a tactic is focused on, along with other grammar corrections, in the last year of British Primary school).
So in fact, "Jesus' cross was heavy." is in fact correct, and the "Charles's" quote is incorrect. At least, that is what I have been taught in every single English class I have attended, plus Official QVC English GCSE Textbooks.

That strikes me as odd. Every grammar class I ever had taught that you only used a following apostrophe if the root word was a plural ending in "s". Otherwise, you're supposed to use an apostrophe with a following "s", even if the word ends in an "s" to begin with.

Besides, just say the sentences in question. When I read them aloud, I hear two distinct "s" sounds at the end of each possessive proper name. "Jesus's" gets this across. "Charles'" does not.

 

[Sailor Taurus]

I know it sounds like two Ss, but not everying you say has to be spelt how it sounds (hence silent letters), and I have been taught that you never add an extra S on the end of a word ending with S, including with names.

 

[ForeverZero]

I think the apostrophe should be at the end when the subject word ends with a 's'.
Just making a comment, it is funny to see some interesting forum about how to properly write in English, since in my opinion it is a fairly simple language, at least it is compared to german... :S

 

[Anonymous]

What language is the hardest to learn depends on what your native tongue is, of course, but English is considered very difficult to master. It's all the exceptions to the grammar and spelling rules that make it difficult, not to mention it has the most words of any language, period.

We should all learn Esperanto. We'd be happier.

 

[Sailor Taurus]

I have two friends who natively speak Portuguese but speak English aswell. Caio speaks practically fluent English (he's only 16), and he say's it's p**s easy to learn. Miranda isn't so fluent, but she says English is a beautiful language.

BTW, on the topic of language speaking, how come some program installers have the option to install in "American" english and "UK" english?

 

[ForeverZero]

well my native tongue is spanish , which is kind of confusing, at least thats what my foreign teachers used to say. I study in a german school and learned french, german and english there, so in comparisson, i find english to be easiest of 'em all. Of course it has rules, what language doesnt? but to speak just above average you dont have to know that many words or rules as in french or german. Even though i heard french is similar to spanish (meaning it could be easier for me to learn) nothing compared to the simple and trusty english .
i dont intend to discuss it here but just to add a experience i had, maybe some of you disagree or have a different opinion about which one the hardest language is, and thats ok. But to make things clear, im not trying to say with all this that if you dont know how to speak properly english then you suck, even though i say its simple i make mistakes, just look this post :P

 

[Anonymous]

It isn't the rules, it's the multiple exceptions to the rules that makes English difficult. Although English is technically a Germanic language, it contains loan words from nearly every major langauge on Earth, and those words can bring along their own grammar rules (such as Latin words like fungus which is pluralized as fungi), not to mention their own shades of meaning. For example, paternal does not mean exactly the same thing as fatherly.

For an example of what I mean, let's look at the words house, mouse, moose, and goose. Houses is the plural of house, mice is the plural of mouse, moose is either plural or singular, and geese is the plural of goose. What the heck kind of sense does that make? There's no way to know that except through memorization.

Incidently, Spanish is rated one of the easiest languages to learn because it's rules are fairly simple, straightforward, and there are few exceptions. Only Esperanto (an artificial language) is typically rated as easier.

 

[qirin]

the title of this thread should be "writing properly in english," or better still, "writing proper english." properly is an adverb and shouldn't go before the verb ("writing"). it's like saying "learning how to fastly run."