Reflexive Words and Style

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

DOC

I read something interesting the other day. A popular writer observed that the people making the decisions about what gets published are 20-something girls in NYC.

 

[Guest]

You can read?

 

[Guest]

I prefer to use the word 'moue' for that shape of the mouth. It sounds soooo cool.

It does.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

It was braille.

 

[Oblimo]

Ever hear of a Chili Pepper?

I put Chili Peppers in my Tuna Fish salad. You got a problem wid dat?

 

[Boxlicker101]

When I saw this thread, I thought it was about reflexive pronouns. Now I find out it is about redundant words. Actually, some of those words in the first post aren't really all that redundant. Waving a hand, as opposed to waving wildly with a whole arm, or with a handkerchief or a warning flag, for instance.

 

[Frank Noir]

From an addendum to the style guide of a publisher I deal with: the following terms will no longer be accepted: The list is presented verbatim with their comments.

===========
He shrugged his shoulders. (what else is he gonna shrug?)
She waved her hand at them. (why not just waved at them?)
He squinted his eyes. She blinked her eyes. (as if one might
squint/blink another body part?)
Bald-headed man (unlike a bald-chested man?)
Breathing in and out (is there another way to breathe?)
She pursed her lips together.
He nodded his head.
Swallowed visibly or shook visibly (as opposed to invisibly?
BUT "appeared/was visibly shaken" is correct. Entirely different
things.)
PIN number. PIN means personal identification number. You wouldn't
say personal identification number number.
She thought to herself (who else would she think to?)
"the reason is because"
=============

I'm pissed. I think they're getting overly nit-picky. Comments?

I would probably use a lot of those phrases, but that's because I'm a lousy writer. And if anyone pointed them out, I'd mostly agree (except possibly "purse" without "lips" - I wouldn't want to read that).

But I mean, "the reason is because" is vile!

 

[Boxlicker101]

I would probably use a lot of those phrases, but that's because I'm a lousy writer. And if anyone pointed them out, I'd mostly agree (except possibly "purse" without "lips" - I wouldn't want to read that).

But I mean, "the reason is because" is vile!

As far as the lips are concerned, I think it's "together" that is redundant.

Some of the others I would use. "She thought to herself" as opposed to thinking out loud, which is something I do frequently.

I think swallowed or shook visibly is alright too, since it would mean the action was very noticeable.

ETA: Personal Identification Number Number doesn't bother me as much as Automatic Teller Machine Machine. Vehicle Identification Number Number doesn't bother me at all.

 

[Xelebes]

"PIN number. PIN means personal identification number. You wouldn't
say personal identification number number."

Yes you would - on the condition that the PIN itself is different than the number used to access it. That is, it is stored as a binary/hexadecimal number but the number used to decypher it is decimal. We are dealing with this statement: A = f(A).

 

[Pure]

i like it

in most ways, it's an excellent list. wordiness and redundancy should be abolished and undergo complete, total, 100% abolition.

 

[AllardChardon]

I would agree that is usage that makes the difference. As in, she waved her lacey gloved hand. He shrugged his immense shoulders.

I wrote a historical novel dating from 1857. Contractions were not used in written speech at that time, only spoken. After 33 chapters were done, I thought, a friend pointed out all the contractions. I spent days searching the manuscript to find them all. Now it is difficult to include them in my writing and my speech patterns. The mind is a funny thing and I realize that this is a tangent.

Good editing is a pain in the ass to do yourself and difficult because you are so close to the project. A first time author must polish the piece until it shines. The old ways are going by the wayside.

The computer has changed the amount of people who are attempting to make a living by writing and so the competition is fierce. I am still editing my manuscript, nearing perfection with intention that my errors are slight.

Nothing works as well as reading the work ALOUD to someone else. You will find everything that is wrong very quickly.

 

[secretme]

I'm a fence sitter on this topic...


I totally agree with:

I agree with some of those, depending on the writer's style. But really, nits are being picked to death here-- just try writing; "She pursed," and see if your readers can make any sense out of that.

You can swallow and shake invisibly, or at least, discretely, or visibly and obviously.

You can wave a hand, a hanky, a sword, a white flag, a tail, if you're wearing one.
You can blink a lantern, or a stop light, or your flashlight.

Breathing in and out is a mood-- usually, you have to concentrate on your breathing, to simply breath in or out. Otherwise, yeah, it's not so necessary.

And I don't care about that repeated 'number'-- everyone says 'PIN number,' even my bank's weblogin.

And:

What gets me is that I consider some of these phrases idioms; that is English usages that violate rules of grammar or sense but are accepted by convention, such as "It's me" rather than the correct, "It is I," and some of them achieve a special emphasis by redundancy.

"He thought to himself," to me, is subtly different than, "he thought." I'll admit, this isn't the end of the world, but "thinking to [one's]self" implies a private, furtive kind of thinking that "he thought" doesn't.

It's like, why say, "he kept his thoughts to himself" when you could similarly say, "He kept his thoughts"? Because where else is he going to keep his thoughts if not to himself? But the "himself" serves a purpose here, as it does in thinking to oneself.

In any case, this one publisher is going way the hell overboard on their style guide. Because their editors get paid by the ms. and not by the hour, the eds now want the manuscripts to be dead rotten perfect upon submission. They even expect authors to hire professional proofreaders to proof the ms. before submission, which is unheard of. They were discussing a cut-off of one error per ten pages! More than this and they'd return the ms to the author. This is much more stringent than New York standards.

It makes me want to shrug and purse. "Maybe I need a new publisher," I think.

But I also think of the situation the same way I think of active versus passive sentence structure. Using one over the other in the correct instance only makes the writing better.

There are appropriate times to use any phrasing for emphasis or mood or whatever. I don't think that all publishers get that all of the time. Maybe if you told them why you wrote it the way you did then they'd back off...

On the other hand, it is one more publisher than most of the rest of us have . . .

Too True!

 

[Stella_Omega]

...Nothing works as well as reading the work ALOUD to someone else. You will find everything that is wrong very quickly.

It's really hard to read graphic sex scenes aloud, not to mention finding someone who'll listen to them...

 

[elfin_odalisque]

From an addendum to the style guide of a publisher I deal with: the following terms will no longer be accepted: The list is presented verbatim with their comments.

===========
He shrugged his shoulders. (what else is he gonna shrug?)
She waved her hand at them. (why not just waved at them?)
He squinted his eyes. She blinked her eyes. (as if one might
squint/blink another body part?)
Bald-headed man (unlike a bald-chested man?)
Breathing in and out (is there another way to breathe?)
She pursed her lips together.
He nodded his head.
Swallowed visibly or shook visibly (as opposed to invisibly?
BUT "appeared/was visibly shaken" is correct. Entirely different
things.)
PIN number. PIN means personal identification number. You wouldn't
say personal identification number number.
She thought to herself (who else would she think to?)
"the reason is because"
=============

I'm pissed. I think they're getting overly nit-picky. Comments?

Hiding behind the loveseat, I agree with the publisher. The degree of redundancy you get in lower grade fiction is a turnoff.

'I nodded' is self-explanatory. 'I pursed my labia' needs stating.

Where the action denotes the body part, I go with the publisher. If you want to wink with the rosebud of your anus - that needs clarification.

The issue of acronyms is still a bit foggy, though most banks on internet banking, now ask, 'if you have forgotten your PIN, please...'

Accordind to Webter's, bald means with no hair on the head so why write 'bald-headed'? Bald pussy is a different case.

Basically, I go with the publisher.

 

[Guest]

It's really hard to read graphic sex scenes aloud, not to mention finding someone who'll listen to them...

*raises hand*

I'll listen!

 

[Boxlicker101]

Some of those phrases seem awfully out of context. For instance, I might say: "He nodded his head, letting me know he was listening carefully." I don't see anything very redundant about that sentence. Or: "He shrugged his shoulders in acceptance." Or: "Do you want a reason why your boyfriend can't spend the night with you? The reason is because I said so!" Or: "She was so frightened she shook visibly."

At the same times, I don't think I will ever say: "pursed her lips together"

 

[AllardChardon]

Yes, Stella, I would agree that reading graphic sex scenes aloud is challenging and you must find the right audience, even if that is via telephone, one chapter at a time while your listener does whatever they want with their genitalia as you read to them and do whatever you want with yours. Sounds more like phone sex than anything, but fine-tuning your masterpiece can be accomplished at the same time for a double treat for you!! I have tried this with some males friends, I have unlimited long distance with MCI, so it doesn't cost a thing and is fun, actually.

Other than that, I want a good voice recorder so I can read into it and hear it for myself. Money being tight right now, I am using my friends for they are less expensive. Ha.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I guess what bothers me about the list is that it's tending towards editing-by-bot rather than by human. You know that they're just going to do searches on these phrases and then do an error count and return the ms. to you if there's more that one error per page or something, not caring about the context the phrase is in or extenuating circumstances. This is getting too close to bot-writing.

On the other hand, their style sheet did correct some other errors I was making. I didn't know that "towards" and "forwards" were incorrect, for instance. It should be "toward" and "forward".

And "farther" is used only for physical distance while "further" is used to indicate all other types of progress.

They maintain 'til is the correct contraction form of until, however, while I think that's archaic and continue to use till.("The spellings 'til and 'till reflect the commonly held belief that till is a shortened form of until, but till is in fact the older form.http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861720258/till.html)

Live and learn.

 

[AllardChardon]

Dr.

Those are pearls of wisdom you hand down to us and I do appreciate all your input. We all make grammatical errors due to our learned speech patterns, not necessarily understood patterns. In one post I said, I love it when you guys get down to brass tacks. And then immediately wondered what brass tacks meant.

Stem to stern and countless other gems pop into my verbally introduced vocabulary from my educated and eloquent parents without knowing the source of those sayings. All of this finds it way to the surface when I write and some of it is wrong. I thought the word was deterant, but could not find it my dictionary. Instead it is determent. Wrong wiring or sloppy speaking, I am not sure.

I am rambling. It is late. Good night and thanks for the assistance with the work of words.

Allard

 

[sr71plt]

one[/I] error per ten pages! More than this and they'd return the ms to the author. This is much more stringent than New York standards.

What publisher? The only publishers I'd done anything for (nearly thirty) that paid by the manuscript wanted me to do development editing--and they were paying well over the standard by hour or by word rate. (I'm working on one now that, when I've worked the hours out, will probably be twice as profitable for me as if I was being paid by the hour.)

It is true, though, that many pay by the hour and restrict the hours, which goes more, I think to what you are noting--and means that sometimes, by not clearing up basic mistakes, the author doesn't get a good look at the possible content problems from the publisher's editor. Except that I have never, never, never had a publisher expecting pristine copy from the author or gauging the probable error by page (or by anything else, for that matter). That's an urban myth.

 

[sr71plt]

Here are a couple of redundant words I bet will be a surprise to most--but I've been beating them out of a manuscript tonight left and right.

upon (almost always redundant--almost always "on" does just fine).

upcoming (William Safire identified this as one of his pet peeve redundancies).

In the same vein as "PIN number," an almost always "committed" redundancy is SSN number.