Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label grammar. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

Dangling participles - and horses

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have been skimming through a 2012 book by Constance Hale titled Vex, Hex, Smash, Smooch – Let verbs power your writing. On page 232 she says:

 

“Wanna know what really tickles a grammar diva? Dangling participles.

 

Remember, participles exist so that verbs can modify nouns. But a participial phrase really needs to cuddle up right next to the noun it is supposed to modify. If it doesn’t, if it drifts away from its noun and cozies up to another one, it becomes a dangling participle. Here’s my all-time favorite example:

 

Did you see the picture of the horses dangling from the ceiling?

 

That writer meant to refer to a picture hanging from the ceiling, but ended up describing a macabre piece of art (a depiction of horses that were in suspended animation).”

 

You also can find an article from American University titled Participle tense & dangling participles that can be downloaded as a two-page pdf. Another example there is:

 

“Having bitten several pedestrians, the owner forcibly muzzled his dog.”

 

which should instead of man bites pedestrians be:

 

“Having bitten several pedestrians, the dog was muzzled by his owner.”

 

There is a NASA publication by Mary K. McCaskill from 1990 titled Grammar, Punctuation, and Capitalization - A Handbook for Technical Writers and Editors (SP-7084) which can be downloaded as a 115-page pdf. Page 26 discusses dangling participles.

 

The image of dangling horses was derived from this horse statue held by a crane at Wikimedia Commons.

 


Saturday, June 22, 2024

I write speeches in active voice - not passive voice

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An article by the Writing Center for California State University San Marcos (CSUSM) titled Voice and Point of View advises:

 

Passive voice occurs when the verb’s agent (the doer) is not the subject of the sentence. Active voice occurs when the subject of a sentence performs the verb’s action. Active voice is favored in most academic disciplines and everyday speech due to it is considered more assertive and less wordy. However, passive voice is favored in scientific disciplines since the observer may not be aware of what causes a phenomenon.”

 

A second article by The Writing Center for the University of Wisconsin – Madison titled Use the active voice discusses when to use passive voice:

 

“Generally, try to use the active voice whenever possible. Passive voice sentences often use more words, can be vague, and can lead to a tangle of prepositional phrases.”

 

When to use passive voice:

To emphasize the action rather than the actor

To keep the subject and focus consistent throughout a passage

To be tactful by not naming the actor

To describe a condition where the actor is unknown or unimportant

To create an authoritative tone”

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A third article by John Cadley on page 28 in the April 2022 Toastmaster magazine titled Weasel Words gives a specific example:

 

“And let’s not forget the passive voice, a plethora of opportunities for the weaselly minded. For instance, ‘The design was presented to the client.’ Who was the presenter? Nobody, which is exactly what you want if the client hates the work. Compare this to ‘I presented the design to the client.’ That’s the active voice. Never use the active voice. It marks you with a big red X that says, ‘Looking for someone to blame? That’s me!’ Yes, you could take one for the team, but it’s not the weasel way.”

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A fourth article at the National Archives on July 2, 2019 titled Plain Writing Tips – Passive Voice and Zombies explains how to detect passive voice:

 

“So, here’s a handy tip to test your writing (by way of Ellen Fried on the ICN) and make you laugh. If you are afraid your sentence is in the passive voice, add the phrase ‘by zombies.’ If it still makes grammatical sense, it’s in the passive voice.

 

Passive: The form was processed and returned (by zombies).

Active: We completed your request and mailed the form to you…”

 

On April 14, 2024 I blogged about how Undelivered is a book by Jess Nussbaum on the never-heard speeches that would have rewritten history. A brief one was written by General Dwight Eisenhower, to deliver if the D-Day landings had failed:

 

“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based on the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

 

He originally used passive voice, and had said:

 

 “The troops have been withdrawn.”

 

That change was discussed in a fifth article, a speech by Jeffrey Nussbaum titled What Reading Teaches that appeared on pages 38 and 39 in These Vital Speeches - The Best of the 2024 Cicero Speechwriting Awards.

 

A sixth article from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) titled Your Guide to CLEAR WRITING has A Note About Active Voice on page 48:

 

“In the 19th and early 20th centuries, scientists wrote in active voice. But around 1920, scientists started adopting passive voice, possibly because it seemed more objective and impersonal.

 

Scientific journals have swung back to active voice, especially because all majot publication manuals (AMA, APA, Chicago) recommend it. After all, active voice is clear, concise, and direct.

 

In fact, it’s difficult to find any journals that actually advocate for the use of passive voice. And prestigious journals such as the British Medical Journal specifically instruct authors to use active voice.

 

Use active voice as much as possible in your article. Use passive only when the actor is unknown or is of less importance. For example, you may use some passive voice in parts of the method section of your article.”

 

A seventh extremely detailed article by Jacob M. Carpenter from 2022 in Legal Communication & Rhetoric magazine (Volume 19 pages 95 to 127) titled The Problems and Positives, of Passives: Exploring why Controlling Passive Voice and Nominalizations Is About More Than Preference and Style can be downloaded as a 34-page pdf.

 

The image with active and passive was modified from this one at Openclipart. A zombie silhouette also came from there. The weasel was adapted from an image at Wikimedia Commons.

 


 

Sunday, May 2, 2021

A good writer edits drafts of his story, speech, or song

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A writer needs to edit his drafts both for grammar and spelling. The April 27, 2021 Pearls Before Swine cartoon has dialogue where Rat tells us what NOT to do:

 

Goat: Hey, Rat. What are you doing?

Rat: Just got to the end of a story I’m writing. I’m hoping to get it published.

Goat: That’s great. How much time will you need for the re-writing?

Rat: My writing’s perfect the first time.

Goat: I see.

Rat: Revisions are only for sad little losers.

 

Recently I was listening to the radio and heard a 2008 song Human by The Killers. Its chorus is shown above. Use of dancer rather than dancers makes me cringe, and my suggestions for five changes (adding s) are shown in red. Some who couldn’t understand the lyric had transcribed it as saying denser. Brandon Flowers refused to change it, but he claimed to have gotten the idea to use dancer from this quote from Hunter S. Thompson:

"We’re raising a generation of dancers, afraid to take one step out of line"

 

Other songwriters are not afraid to edit their lyrics. Josh Ritter has a song titled Harrisburg on his album The Golden Age of Radio. One version of its second verse says:

 

“Could have stayed somewhere, but train tracks kept going

It seems like they always left soon

And the people he ran with, they moaned low and painful

Sang sad misereres to the moon”

 

I had to look in the Merriam-Webster dictionary to find out the obscure word miserere means a vocal complaint or lament. The acoustic version on the Deluxe Edition and a live version have that verse changed to instead read:

 

“They could have stayed somewhere, train tracks kept going

It seems like they always left soon

And the wolves that he ran with, moaned low and painful

Sang their sad lullabys at the moon, at the moon”

 

Some lyrics are memorable because they contain an unusual phrase, like the title for the popular song Seven Nation Army by the duo The White Stripes. You can watch and listen to it in this YouTube video. I imagine a Seven-Nation-Army might have appeared somewhere in the J. R. R. Tolkien novel The Return of the King. But actually as a child Jack White misheard it as being what is the Salvation Army. There also is a YouTube video with Homer and Bart Simpson starting to play the song. But the murderous opening riff really isn’t played on a bass – it’s on a guitar lowered an octave.   

 


Tuesday, March 2, 2021

Which speech delivery habits do the most people find annoying?

 I got curious and looked for data from surveys or polls about what speech delivery habits people find annoying. I found a blog post by Robbie Hyman at Words Matter on May 25, 2011 titled What to avoid when speaking to a group which listed percentages for nine habits from a Gallup poll. But he didn’t say when it was done, and I couldn’t find it on the Gallup web site. 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A search in Google Books led me to page 98 in a 1999 book by Lillian J. Glass titled The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Verbal Self-Defense. That reference says the poll was done for her back in 1987 for the book Talk to Win. Results are shown above in a bar chart. The top five are interrupting (88%), cursing (84%), mumbling or talking too softly (80%) and a tie between monotonous boring voice and talking too loudly (73%). Note that Robbie Hyman’s blog post missed both the highest percentage (interrupting) and the lowest (foreign accent).    

 

 


   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A book preview from Talk to Win shows more detail: there is a table listing percentages for both Annoys a Lot and Annoys a Little rather than just the Total. Those percentages also are included in an article by Martha Sherrill Dailey in the Washington Post on April 29, 1988 titled Hear ye, hear ye. That table is shown above.

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Results for Annoys a Lot are shown above in a second bar chart. The top three are in the same order as for the Total. Results for Annoys a Little are shown above in a third bar chart. Mumbling (43%) has moved up from third to second, but Interrupting (29%) and cursing (28%) have dropped to almost the bottom of the list.

 

Other articles and blog posts also have reported incorrect results from that Gallup poll. Dirk Moller at Business Connections on October 26, 2010 has an article titled 7 Tips for developing a winning phone voice that claims a recent Gallup poll listed mumbling as the most annoying habit of speech. 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

An undated article by Linnaea Mallette at K.I.S.S. Speaking Tips titled V is for Vocal Variety said a Gallop Poll reveals that talking too fast annoys 55% of people surveyed. Back on November 2, 2009 I blogged about Gallop Poll: A type of drive-by opinion survey (presumably on horseback).

 

Sunday, September 30, 2018

More phony ‘LinkedIn’ phishing emails

















On August 12th I blogged about getting Phony ‘LinkedOut’ and ‘Inlook’ phishing emails. The fakes claiming to be from from LinkedIn got the message grammatically wrong – “You appeared in 6 search this week.”


















































This week there has been a bunch of similar emails – including three so far just today. As shown above, they are ludicrously inept. A real message about searches this week should arrive only once. (Multiple messages would be expected to have the number of searches increse over time, but these three instead showed a decrease). The email addresses also are not consistent with LinkedIn.

Sunday, August 12, 2018

Phony ‘LinkedOut’ and ‘Inlook’ phishing emails


















Back on July 6th I had blogged about getting phishing emails, and that I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck.

On Friday I received a fake 'LinkedOut' email that claimed to be from LinkedIn. But the address was from somewhere else, and the message was grammatically wrong – “You appeared in 6 search this week.”

On Saturday there was one pretending to be from Outlook (Hotmail) with the wrong address, and that warned “Someone just used your password to sign in to your profile.”

The fishing boy silhouette came from Openclipart.

UPDATE August 13, 2018

Kim Kommando has described what happens if you reply to a similar email in a July 31st article titled Sneaky iOS scam spreading now.   

Friday, July 6, 2018

I didn’t just fall off the turnip truck





















In communication details like spelling and grammar are important. This week I received another pair of phishing emails that immediately revealed their fraud via simple mistakes in spelling or grammar.













One was a bogus ‘PayPal’ alert, with a salutation that misspelled customer!





















The other was a 'Microsoft’ account update with an extra "will’ – a glaring departure from English grammar.

The 1939 turnip truck image for illustrating that idiom came from the Library of Congress.

UPDATE July 14, 2018

I got another phony PayPal email warning me "your account was opened form another devices." LOL!




Thursday, July 23, 2009

Pubic speaking???







I read that phrase yesterday in an article title on the eHow web site. They clearly meant to instead say “public speaking.” Pubic is a word too though, so a computer program just for checking spelling will not flag it. A careful human proofreader likely would have found it and fixed it.


A typographical or grammar error in the title of an educational web page (or blog post) already raises multiple questions:


1. Do you not know what you are doing?

2. Do you just not care?

3. In either case, why should I bother to read further?

4. Is your content really so wonderful I should ignore your lack of form?

5. Would I be disappointed if I bought your e-book, CD, or DVD?

6. Should I avoid hiring you?


If I do choose to read further, then I will not be either surprised or upset when I see one error every 1000 to 4000 words (or an error rate of 0.1% to 0.025%). But this week I read a blog post with 10 errors in just 400 words. That is an error rate of 2.5%! Both the horn and flashing red light for my mental bozo alarm went off. That blog did not get added to my RSS reader.


Obvious lack of attention to details suggests sloppy thinking. Most people will never tell you if they are annoyed or even appalled. They just will leave, and you may never get them to return.


Getting absolutely all of the errors out of a book (~100,000 words) is almost impossible. If you don’t believe me, then go to Google, set the options to search in books, and enter the phrase “pubic speaking”. You will find over 100 results!