Introduction

What I Do 

1. Mechanical editing, which covers grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization and so forth 

2. Substantive editing, which addresses content, organization, effectiveness, style, unity, appropriateness to audience, and the like 

3. Developmental editing, which guides the author through the planning and writing of a manuscript 

4. Seminars on grammar, composition, technical writing, business writing, and fiction 

I accept fiction, nonfiction, articles, and technical, academic, and commercial documents. 

What I Don't Do 

1. Documents on a level of technicality that requires an editor from the field 

2. Manuscripts I consider hateful, libelous, or pornographic   

Introduction

It is unbelievable, but the snow is nearly gone. Breakup has morphed into thatching season and soon we will see green grass and trees. It doesn’t get any better.

 Questions

Two clients asked recently about split infinitives. The question of whether splitting infinitives is permissible or not should have been settled a long time ago, but unfortunately, in days gone by this usage was elevated by some language mavens to the status of linguistic sin, much like ending sentences in prepositions. 

Split your infinitives if you need to. It does not always produce a harmonious flow of words, and I do not recommend a split fest. But some sentences scream for a split infinitive. “I want to really participate,” does not mean the same thing as “I really want to participate.” “He never chose to hit his child,” is different from “He chose to never hit his child.” On the other hand, “We had to constantly clean our rooms,” would have done better as “We constantly had to clean our rooms.” 

Most of the old dictates would do better as suggestions. Lots of unneeded split infinitives or end-of-sentence prepositions are awkward, but some are badly needed.

 Grammar Gripes and Style Stumblers

After a study of the 17^th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style, if anything is clear, it is that very little has changed, but a lot has been added or expanded. Discussions of grammar now include, for instance, the occasional (informal) use of they and their with a single antecedent (it is the rule that a student must always carry their student IDs while in school), and the rather problematic use of themself for a singular antecedent. Even relatively trendy usage is discussed in a little more detail, but not a whole lot of significant change has been made to past conventions, as was somewhat the case in the transition from the 15^th to the 16^th edition. 

In this summary of departures from earlier editions, I address only changes in the “Style and Usage” section of Chicago, which, of course, includes mechanics. Also skipped over are the more technical guidelines on mathematics and music, which are of interest to only a small percentage of writers. 

The other two main sections of the manual, “The Publishing Process,” and “Source Citations and Indexes,” fall outside the scope of this newsletter, but should be consulted as needed. As writers you may deal extensively with reference formats, in text and in reference lists, and the best practice is to look those up as you go, especially those (online references come to mind) that have not yet taken up permanent residence in your brain cells. 

So—what changes? Brace yourself.

1. The word internet may now be lowercased.

2. First-choice spelling for email is now the lowercased, unhyphenated version: email.

3. A direct question contained within a sentence, not enclosed in quotation marks, is often preceded by a comma, and capitalized:   

He asked himself, What is this about?

4. Pronoun classes now list reciprocal pronouns (but not reflexive pronouns).

5. Double titles connected by or (an old-fashioned practice) are now preferably punctuated as follows (it used to be done in various ways):

The Tempest, or The Enchanted Island

             Today’s subtitles serve the same purpose.

6. In the matter of titles of websites and blogs, the title of a website that does not now nor ever did have a printed counterpart can be treated like the title of any other website, subject to editorial discretion (and unlike websites whose titles are formatted the same as their printed counterparts). This, I realize, is going to shock the writing world.  

7. Chicago is now distinctly cooling toward the use of ibid. You may still use it (consistently), but the powers that be at the Chicago Manual of Style offices have come to prefer the less-likely-to-be-misunderstood repetition of the author’s name (Smith, 118).

Phew. 

Among the takeaways of the new Chicago is the more thorough and elaborate discussions of grammar and usage issues, which answer most of the questions we all tangle with—or should. Although, of course, these style and spelling adjustments do not add up to a revolution in writing styles, a regular peek at the “Style and Usage” section of Chicago would be useful for most writers, especially if you have not already thoroughly absorbed the 16^th edition. You can now just skip that one and hop right on over to number 17. 

Of course, Chicago is not the only style guide for American English out there. But it is probably the most used, and many more limited professional style guides are a sort of Chicago-plus—Chicago style plus a few additions and variations pertaining to a particular field or discipline. Other general style guides differ from Chicago mainly in details of punctuation and capitalization. The GPO manual, for instance, capitalizes lots of words others don’t. The APA manual is chiefly aimed at the academic world. 

It is worthy of note that stylebooks such as Chicago repeatedly use expressions such as usually, traditionally, conventionally, often, you may, it might be best, Chicago prefers, and so forth. In other words—many “rules” are not written in stone. If you like email with a hyphen, go for it as long as it is in the dictionary and you use it consistently throughout the document. Dictionaries take a long time to catch up with current practice, and even more to delete archaic spellings. However, the people who write stylebooks know what they are talking about. They have studied language thoroughly, discussed it extensively with equally qualified colleagues, and have come up with consistent recommendations we would do well to follow until we have similar credentials and have earned the right to deliberately—not negligently—break general conventions (there is a difference between ignorance and creativity).

 Terrible Twos

 Media Turkeys

I hope the individual I heard using the term residentially impaired (homeless) was joking. On second thought, it is not a humorous concept. We certainly do not need more euphemisms to hide reality. 

Advertisers once again want us to have “less worries” and make “less mistakes,” use “knowledgeable experts,” play with “fellow teammates,” and answer the Olympic question, “What if it will ultimately hurt her in the end?” 

Fewer, please. And experts had better be knowledgeable, teammates are fellow players, and ultimately never comes at the beginning.

Potholes

One television commentator described what I think was a gas tank as “fully empty.” 

 Everybody Does It

The massacre of pronouns shows no signs of abating. Time and again, in the media, online, and in face-to-face conversation we hear such gems as “between he and I,” or “a match between she and the second-seeded opponent.” I used to be pretty sure that a simple reminder that a preposition requires a he, her, me, us, them (the accusative form of the pronoun) would solve the problem. Similarly, in sentences containing a compound direct or indirect object, we keep hearing, “They drove their brother and I to school,” “She gave he and I an assignment,” or even “him and I,” where also the accusative case is needed (me, him, her, us, them). I used to think that for those who are not sure about the form of the pronoun, simply omitting the compound, and simplifying it to “They drove me to school,” and “She gave me an assignment,” would make the choice crystal clear. But now I am not so sure. I still think that the simplified format answers the question of what form to use, but I am not too certain that the question is being asked.