Spelling Still Matters

If you read anything on the internet, you will see an endless supply of spelling mistakes that may be merely humorous; or they may show that the writer was careless or unaware; or they may have arisen in a situation when the writer/publisher misspelled a word in such as way as to create a different word, with a different meaning. Of course (sadly), the writer may not actually know which word will convey their intended meaning.

Borrowing from the never-ending online supply, here are a few more of the spelling (or diction, i.e., word choice) errors I have noticed recently:

She probably set the date before her sister in law got pregnant, and can't change it without inuring huge fines from the venue.

To inure means to toughen, accustom or habituate, and with these meanings it is a transitive verb - one that takes an object.  So, one could accurately say: "The strict policies of the wedding venue inured all the users to the unpleasant likelihood of paying a fine."

Inure can also mean to take effect or to become advantageous; in this sense, it is an intransitive verb - one that does not take an object.  For this meaning, one might say:  "The steep fines inure to the benefit of the wedding venue, but they inure to the detriment of the wedding couple who had to change the date of their nuptials."

I believe the writer meant to use the verb incur, which means "to bring upon oneself."  You might incur a fine for exceeding the speed limit; you might incur a fine for underpaying your taxes; you might incur the wrath of your spouse or partner for arriving late to the dinner party.  Doesn't it make more sense in this example to say, "She probably...can't change [the date] without 'bringing upon herself' huge fines" than it does to say "She probably...can't change [the date] without 'accustoming' huge fines"? [Accustoming the fines to what? to the unpleasant necessity of being billed and dunned?]

If one chooses to tow the party line - If a person is towing a line, they are pulling it or tugging it, as in the picnic game of tug-of-war.  In that game, the players on two teams stand in two lines opposite each other, with everyone on the team holding onto a long rope; and at the signal, both teams tow on the rope or line as hard as they can, to try to pull the other team across a marked boundary.  Humans might also tow (haul) a line when pulling a barge on a river or a canal.

On the other hand, the expression "to toe the line" started out meaning "to line up with your toes against the line," as at the start of a footrace.  If players are to remain eligible, they are not allowed to let even the tip of one toe move across the starting line.  They have to keep every toe on or behind the line.  And so, "to toe the line" - whether in politics or in any other endeavor - means to conform strictly and rigidly to expectations and rules.  "To toe the party line" means to follow exactly what the (political) party tells you to do, even if your own principles or the wishes of your constituents diverge from that.

Funnily enough, someone could make a case to say that it makes sense to "tow the party line" if a candidate or elected official is working voluntarily in conjunction with others in the party to reach a common goal.  But if their actions are dictated by going along with the party's wishes, no matter what, even against their own better judgment, then they are said to "toe the party line."

The learning curb is a little slow here.

There are several problems with this misused expression.  First of all, a curb (aka kerb) is a low barrier usually made of concrete or stones on the side of a street, to help set apart the sidewalk.  As a verb, curb can be used to mean "hold something back" (such as your enthusiasm) or "prevent something" (such as the spread of swine flu).  Did this writer mean to say that the barrier to learning is operating in a slow manner?  It might make sense to say that the writer is slow to climb over a learning curb, if such a thing exists.

Educators and psychologists (and now practically everyone) often speak of a "learning curve."  That is an expression that dates back to the 1880's, describing variations in the speed of learning or the degree of retention of new knowledge - which can be represented on a graph as a curve (often a steep one).  The steepness may show that in the first stages of learning, the student remembers a great deal, but then the amount of retained knowledge levels out afterwards.  Or the steepness of the curve may demonstrate how easy or how difficult it is to learn something initially.

The more common expression is that "the learning curve is steep," meaning that there is so much to learn that it is quite daunting at first.  That is what I believe this writer meant.  And that is certainly the way I feel when I try out some new software, or when Yahoo!, HubPages, Microsoft, or Google decide that the old way of doing things doesn't suit them and so they make radical changes.  Then - for someone like me - the learning curve truly is steeeeeeeeep.

And, many people's "favorite" (hahaha):  your point is mute.  Mute means unable (or unwilling) to speak or utter a sound.  Mute can also be used to mean "soften or deaden" a sound or color. A trumpet may use a device known as a mute to produce a softer, thinner tone. An artist might alter some of the colors on the palette or smudge them on the canvas to mute their effect.  In law, a person might "stand mute," that is, refuse to enter a plea when being arraigned and thus refuse to stand trial. 

But usually, in a discussion or debate, the debater will speak of a moot point.  In this context, moot can actually mean one of two things: one is that the point is debatable, open to debate, not settled by any stretch of the imagination; the other meaning is that it is academic, hypothetical, and of no real practical value.  In a formal debate, I would assume that the former meaning would prevail ("open to debate, not settled yet").  In online forum arguments, both meanings crop up from time to time, with the balance of those I've seen weighing in as meaning "worthless."

So, does this writer mean that their adversary's point "cannot speak"? (= mute) or that the point "refuses to stand trial"? (= mute) Or do they mean that the point "is not settled and is open to debate"? (= moot) or perhaps that it is an academic argument of no real value, such as "how many people-who-don't-agree-with-me-in-some-way-or-another can fit into a telephone booth"?  That is truly a moot point!

Spelling Matters

Yes, spelling does matter.  But before leaving that point, I want to mention one reason for choosing that title for this post, which can actually mean two different things - related, to be sure, but different.

One meaning is the one I opened with: the title of the post can mean to say (with assumed, amplified, or understood words here in brackets) - "[Correct] Spelling [does make a difference; in the course of written communication, it] Matters."

The second meaning turns the title into a label, describing what will be found in the post: Matters [or issues, subjects, or concerns] [related to] Spelling. In this case, spelling once upon a time started its life in the language as a verb form (present participle or gerund); that form became used as a noun, meaning the art of doing that thing well (that is, making sure words are spelled correctly) and also meaning the correct arrangement of letters that appears when the word is spelled correctly.  Finally, when it is used as in the title above, the noun spelling in conjunction with the noun matters is used to explain the kind of matters I want to discuss, and so it takes on a sort of adjectival quality.

The whole subject of spelling is a sensitive one these days.  A lot of people focus on problems with your and you're; it's and its; to, too, and two.  I would like to spotlight some other words I have seen misspelled such that the misspelling changes the meaning of the sentence.

These are actual examples; some have been modified to protect the unaware:

My personal take on blaring music idiots (yes, they are idiots), is that they are insecure (baring any problems with their hearing).

When the writer wrote baring, instead of barring (or even bearing), she indicated that the problems were being laid bare; that is, they were being uncovered.  What she meant to indicate, I believe, was that she wanted to exclude (or bar) a listener's problems with hearing from her blanket label of loud-music players as idiots who are insecure. It's not very likely in this case, but someone could speak of bearing a problem, meaning taking on a problem, shouldering the responsibility for a problem, or carrying the weight of the problem.  I don't believe that is the case here.

The universe teams with intelligent life. 

This may be my favorite spelling mistake ever.  As written, with the misspelling, it means that the universe is on the same team as intelligent life, like a sports team, a sales team, a spell bowl team, etc.  (I certainly hope this is what happens!)  I believe, though, that the writer should have typed teems, meaning [it] is abundant, [it] overflows or swarms. 
If you think a stuttering foreigner with an accent will be as effective a receptionist as someone who has perfect annunciation, you're wrong.

I'll hazard a guess that the writer went to a parochial school, but failed to learn the difference between The Annunciation and enunciation (which is what he meant).  Annunciation can be used to describe any act of announcing, but it is especially used (capitalized) to describe the event of the angel Gabriel announcing to Mary the news that she would be the mother of the Christ. It can also be used to name the feast day when this is commemorated.  As a mnemonic, notice the ann- at the beginning of both words: announce and annunciation.

In talking about good pronunciation, with clarity as its paramount trait, the writer intended to mention enunciation, the act of enunciating or pronouncing articulately.  I can't suggest a great mnemonic to help remember this spelling, other than to point out that it is so-to-speak the opposite of annunciation: e- instead of a-, one -n- instead of two.

But, just in case you think you've grasped the differences between these two words, be aware that enunciation can carry some of the same meaning as annunciation (that is, announcing, proclaiming or declaring) - but it does not work the other way around!

I have redone all articles before this new venue.  I really believe this is more than a misspelling.  I believe the writer actually chose the wrong word.  I feel confident that she meant venture, not venue.  A venture is an undertaking, often a risky or hazardous one (although it has become increasingly more tame in its meaning over the years); a venue is the location of a crime or the location of the trial for the crime.  Venue can also mean the location of any event. 

But, just to confuse things, it can also mean the position someone takes in a debate or argument.  That meaning could - theoretically - apply here, since the writer was talking about a new direction being taken on the self-publishing site where she writes.  I'm skeptical, though.


In any event, misspellings can be entertaining, but they can also be confusing and misleading.  The process of communicating improves immensely, when you are sure you are using the word you actually mean and when you make sure you spelled it correctly.

World's Worst Headline? Maybe So

I don't want to go over the top in my description, but I saw a headline recently that I would be proud to nominate for the dubious distinction of being the "World's Worst Headline."

A good headline needs to capture the attention of readers in such a way that they will want to read the entire article; it needs to tantalize or tease them a bit in some way. The headline ought to supply information that allows the reader to know what the article is about in a concise, efficient manner.  That means certain words will be omitted and some grammatical constructions may be revised, making them sound different from everyday speech.

The bottom line, though, is that the headline needs to communicate effectively, ideally with one and only one reading, and that is where my nomination for the World's Worst Headline fell absolutely flat.  When I saw this, I read it through half a dozen times without understanding for certain who did what, or thought what, or was where why or when.  I took it upon myself to try to understand it without reading the article, but I failed and finally broke down and had a look.

If you have already seen this, or heard a report about the incident, the headline may not strike you the way it did me at first. If you haven't, see how long it takes you to figure out the meaning.

Woman Thought Bound Child in Walmart Lot Abducted

Keep in mind, at the time you first see this you have no idea what the headline is about.  Among the guesses that I came up with during my initial moments of confusion were these:

• A woman was thought to be bound (tied up); a child in the Walmart parking lot was abducted.
• A woman who was thought to be bound for (heading in the direction of) a child in the Walmart parking lot was abducted (that is, the woman was abducted).
• A woman who was thought to have bound (tied up) a child in the Walmart parking lot was abducted.
• A woman thought that a bound (tied-up) child in the Walmart parking lot abducted something or someone - but whom?
• A woman was thought to have have bound a child in Walmart, and the lot (meaning either the whole group or a place to park) was abducted.

Did you possibly notice that nearly all of my guesses considered thought to be the verb's passive voice past participle describing something about the woman, rather than an active verb in the past tense showing what she was doing?  That is because in headlines, a verb is often omitted entirely; used as a command (imperative mood); used in the present tense to talk about the past; or used as a passive past participle, as I assumed this to be.  Here is a sample of headlines from today, showing each of these categories:

 

Command Form or Imperative

Get in the Game: Fantasy Football 2012
See the best RNC party invitation yet 

Verb Missing but Understood or Able to Be Inferred

Stunning drawing of Russian girl not a photograph
Trail of ink: Tracking rare tattoo-related infection
Diane's life since 'Cheers'

Active Verb in Present Tense, Possibly Referring to Past Tense

Signs point to a big Romney victory
Gawker publishes records about Romney’s investments
Dazzling map shows more than 150 years of hurricanes
Celebrity Chef loses 120 lb. 

Past Participle Used to Substitute for a Passive Voice, Present or Past Tense Construction

Swift [was] confronted about song
New AIDS-like disease [was or has been] found
Mom [has been or was] released in son's death
MyFord Touch System [was or has been] panned
Wildfire [...] slowed in California, still threatens homes

This last example is unique in the list because it can logically mean either that the wildfire was slowed  (because of weather or the efforts of others, for example) - a past tense passive - or it could mean that the wildfire slowed of its own accord (an intransitive verb) . This latter possibility, the more likely one, is an active voice verb in the past tense.  It works in this headline, because both interpretations convey the same essential meaning: the wildfire is slower now than it was before. (Can't you sort of hear the editor's voice in your head, "Read more to find out why..."?)  

Confusing Meanings 

Another problem with the World's Worst Headline is the use of words that have multiple meanings, primarily in this instance the word bound, which can mean tied up, moving in a direction towards (bound for), or even to move in a bouncing manner.  This would not have been quite so confusing if I the reader had not already been set up for confusion by that word thought. It turns out that thought was used as an active voice, past tense verb. Finally, the word abducted could refer to a past event or to something that was happening at the same time as some other verb in the headline (in this case, thought).  And it could be either passive (the child had been abducted) or active (the child abducted something or someone).   After I gave up trying to decode the headline and read the article, I learned that it meant this:  

A woman was of the opinion (she thought) that a tied-up (bound) child in the Walmart parking lot was the victim of an abduction.

The best protection against a terrible headline is to request a reading of it from someone who has no idea what topic you have been researching or the events about which you've been writing, so that they can see it for the first time without any preconceived notions - just like your readers out in the wide, wide world will see it.

ESL Writers on the Internet

When it comes to writers whose first language is not English, I've seen two distinct types stand out:  one type is those who are so skilled, so gifted and intelligent in their knowledge of English, they sound much better than the run-of-the-mill writer who learned the English language as a tiny tot.  But more noticeable are the ones who have numerous obvious problems in their use of the language.  And, of course, some writers will fall in-between these extremes.

Language mistakes (grammar, spelling, punctuation, word choice, word order) among these writers will probably include the same mistakes as first-language English-speakers make, possibly with a little twist, as well as a few more that are probably unique.

• Omission of the or a, contrary to normal usage            

               Ex.:  Literal meaning of this word is...
               Usual English:  The literal meaning of this word is...

• Including to as part of a verb infinitive in one of the instances when it should be omitted
• Confusion of collective or abstract nouns
• Confusion of expressions related to time

              Ex.:  I am here since last two years.
              Usual:  I have been here for the last two years;  OR
                         I have been here since 2010;  OR
                         I have been here since two years ago.
              Supplying additional information, this could also read:
                         I am here as a two-year member of this website.

              Ex.: It is not same one which I had joined before two years.
              Usual:  It is not the same one [which] I joined two years ago.
                         [Note: Which may be omitted here; or one could use that instead.]

              Ex.: A year back from now
              Usual: A year ago
              Not as usual, but okay:  A year before now

• Confusion of verb tenses
• Confusing the number of the verb (plural vs. singular or vice versa)
• Using the wrong preposition
• Using a contraction when usual English would not (very confusing, since we use them so often)

              Ex.: The person I'm today is better than yesterday.
              Usual: The person I am today....

• Confusing verb forms in such a way as to muddle the tense and voice of the verb
• Mixing up two or more different expressions that could be used in similar circumstances

               Ex.:  My main goal is to play my best part in guiding young people.
               Usual:  My main goal is to play a part in guiding young people.
                          Could be modified: to play an important part;
                                                        to play a vital part; to play a significant part
                  OR   My main goal is to do my best in guiding young people.
                           My main goal is to do my best to guide young people.
                           My main goal is to do the best I can to guide young people.
                           My main goal is to do the best job possible in guiding....
                           [Numerous other variations are possible.]

All of the examples I have included here are slightly modified versions of some sentences I have seen on HubPages.  Many of them were written by ESL writers who fall somewhere between the ones with numerous, truly problematic errors and those who are better than many English-as-a-first-language writers.

My goal for the immediate future is to provide other actual examples of language problems from both ESL writers and from native speakers of English, along with recommendations for improvement.  Let me preempt some objections by saying, Yes, there are and will be some mistakes in my writing too, and I don't mind having them pointed out. 

In cases where there are several acceptable options, I may respond to explain the way I wrote it in the first place. I believe one of the best ways we can come to understand one another as people is to talk about what we mean when we speak, and why we said things the way we did.

There will be more.

My Personal Pet Peeves

In spite of the lack of posts since this blog was first begun, the actual proofreading service has been busy, both with simple proofreading and with complete rewrites.  Now, at this time, I believe it will be helpful to post samples of the problems that I encounter every day and I plan to make that my focus for the immediate future.  First, though, I have a broad sketch of the categories of problems that I see in English on the internet (and elsewhere, frankly). Most of these are problems that I see among first-language speakers of English.

1) Loss or muddling of pronoun cases, including relative or interrogative pronouns (confusing I and me, he and him, she and her, we and us, they and them, who and whom);

2) Muddling of a verb's singular and plural forms, especially with collective nouns and with introductory phrases such as there is and the thing is;

3) Muddling (or even loss) of forms of the subjunctive;

4) Misuse of prepositions - omitting them altogether at the end of a sentence (thereby changing the meaning or grammar of the sentence) or adding them unnecessarily, particularly with the word which;

5) Unconventional comparisons and unconventional use of paired conjunctions or focusing adverbs - mixing up as, than, and that or both...and;

6) Spelling errors that seem to be at the top of everyone's "Most Wanted" list: its vs. it's, your vs. you're, et sim.

All of the above (with the possible exception of #6) could be considered grammar problems.  In a different category can be found mistakes of what we used to call diction, that is, word choice.  Sometimes the problem is more of a spelling problem (advice vs. advise, apart vs. a part), in which the misspelling changes the meaning or use of a word. In other situations, actual homonyms or slightly similar-sounding words may be mixed up (rather vs. whether; portend vs. contend).

This list of potential problems comes from people who speak English as their first language. When we look at the problems from people who speak English as a second or third language, other issues arise, and that will be the subject of a future post.

Comments and questions are invited!

How Do I Use This Service?

If you have only a few articles that need editing or tweaking, you may send me an e-mail through the link here or through the contact link on my profile page at HubPages: http://hubpages.com/profile/Aficionada.

Send your request for work, along with links to the articles that need work.  If they are not currently published, send me their titles, along with the word count for each one and any comments (if there are any) made by an online publisher that has refused the articles. 

Wait until I send you an e-mail confirming the order, before you make payment through the PayPal button here.  (You can pay with a credit card or with a PayPal account.) In the e-mail, I will also give you an estimate of when you will receive the article back.  The time will depend on how many orders are ahead of yours. 

If you have a large order, please contact me to ask about my availability, before you send details of the articles. You can pay for the work in batches of ten articles.

Articles that I cannot access through a link can be sent in the body of an e-mail.  I will return them as Word documents, showing your original article side-by-side with the edited version, to assist you in writing future articles. Alternatively, I will open a Google Doc for communicating with you about your article and providing the edited version of it.

I welcome your comments, and I look forward to receiving your orders!  Please let others know about my service, so that their writing can be brought up to the standards of their publishers.

A Simple Service for Improving Your Written English

Blogs on Blogger are available in over forty languages! But in other areas of the internet, writers might be required to publish in English only.  For the writer whose first language is not English, this poses the problem that their writing may be flagged for being substandard.


This service - Well Written Proofreading Service - is offered to assist writers whose English needs an upgrade.  Speakers of other languages are the initial target group, but not the only one.  We who speak English as our first language often benefit from having a second pair of eyes look at our work, to give suggestions for making it as clear, precise, effective, and suited to its purpose as possible.


Description of Service


For a fee of $5, you will receive an improved version of your manuscript up to 1500 words. Please note that in cases needing extreme rewriting, this fee may have to be increased.  Fees for longer manuscripts will be assessed proportionally to their length and need for revision.


The voice and style of your article will be retained - for example, a casual style will not be forced to become a formal one.  Some grammatical constructions which would be appropriate within the style you have chosen will not be changed merely because a grammar book says they should be.


Your manuscript will be returned to you either (a) in the form of a Word document attached to an e-mail, with the text showing recommended changes side-by-side with your original text, along with additional suggestions in the form of comments, or (b) as a Google Doc document.  In cases where neither of these methods is possible, we will communicate with the writer to work out a solution.


All payments must be received through PayPal before work on your material will begin.


Disclaimer


This service makes no warranty about the accuracy or originality of your material.  It is solely your responsibility to submit only material that you are legally entitled to publish. This service accepts no responsibility for material that may infringe upon the rights of others, including but not limited to copyrights, trademarks and patents. There is also no guarantee that the improved manuscript will be accepted by a publishing service, since each writer's site has its own specific guidelines and standards.