January 2, 2024

How to write addresses

TOPICS: , ,

One of the most common things I have to change in the articles I edit is the way addresses are written. Here's an example typical of the stuff that comes us:

The museum is at 281 Maple Ln., Topeka, KN, 50022.

There’s nothing wrong with that. In fact, there’s almost no wrong way to write an address. And, of course, getting it right is much more important than making it pretty. But the way that the AP and Chicago style manuals tell editors to write them can be beneficial to any writer who wants to go easy on their readers’ eyes and doesn’t have an editor to help them.

The most important thing is consistency. An article or blog entry that changes its address style from one sentence to the next isn’t doing the reader any favors. It's jarring and can detract from the information: “The museum, located at 9120 Third Street, moved from its former location at 9128 43rd Terr. in order to be closer to its corporate offices at Three 82nd St.”

So here are two simple approaches, based on the two major editing styles, that can make your addresses more flowing and integrated into a larger message.

Many newspaper styles say to use numerals for everything in an address, including numbers less than 10. They abbreviate only “Street,” “Avenue,” and “Boulevard," making them “St.,” “Ave.,” and “Blvd.” But they only abbreviate these terms when they appear with an exact street address. If the street name stands alone, the street name shouldn’t be abbreviated. So, according to this style, you’d write:

The museum is at 281 3rd St., at the corner of 3rd Street and Wilshire Boulevard.

Newspapers don’t use postal codes for states. So it’s “California” instead of “CA.” If you want to mirror newspaper style, avoid those two-letter postal abbreviations. On the other hand, if you like the handy two-letter versions better, you can make that a style rule for your own website or blog.

Also, many newspapers don’t include the state for any address in the state the newspaper covers. So, for example, in the Los Angeles Times, cities mentioned are always considered to be within California unless expressly stated otherwise. "They visited Fresno; Eureka; Eugene, Oregon; and Spokane, Washington."

Book and magazine styles don’t like abbreviating street names. They usually spell out Boulevard regardless of whether it appears in “100 Wilshire Boulevard” or just plain old “Wilshire Boulevard.”

And no styles I know of ever abbreviate Drive, Circle, Terrace, Way, or Place.

So if you want an easy-to-remember and easy-to-read style, just either spell out every street name or spell out all but Ave., St., and Blvd. appearing with street numbers, use numerals for all numbers, and only include states when they're not obvious.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

December 26, 2023

What's the plural of 'media'?

TOPICS: , ,

Whenever I need to use a word that has more than one correct form, say for example past-tense forms like dreamed vs. dreamt or plural forms like fungi vs. funguses, I check the dictionary. For every word with multiple correct options, dictionaries always have a preference. And they indicate it by listing their preferred form first.

For example, in Webster’s New World College Dictionary under fungus, the first thing you see is “fungi or funguses,” meaning the dictionary prefers fungi.

 So you can imagine my shock when I looked up the noun medium and saw that the dictionary’s first choice for a plural was not media but mediums. Had I stopped there, I would have forever believed that this Webster’s — the dictionary I have to follow in most of my work — would have me say, “Print is one news medium, digital is another, and together they’re two different types of mediums.”

 That’s completely counter to conventional wisdom. Most people who pay attention to this stuff will tell you without hesitation that one news medium and another news medium together form two news media. (Which is different from a fortune-teller type “spiritual medium,” which in the plural is “mediums.”) Yet, in the very place that this dictionary indicates its preferred forms, it seemed to be saying that I should opt for mediums over media.

 Good thing I kept reading. Under its third definition for the noun medium, Webster’s says: "3. pl. usually media: any means, agency, or instrumentality, specif., a means of communication that reaches the general public and carries advertising.”

 In other words, the preferred plural indicated at the beginning of the listing wasn't the same as the preferred plural for one specific definition of the word. So, yes, if you consult two fortune tellers you talked to two spiritual mediums. But if you read a newspaper and a magazine, you consulted two types of media.

 As for whether media is necessarily plural, that depends on its use. Media is sometimes treated as a plural, News media are covering this thoroughly, and sometimes treated as a singular, The media is going to have a field day.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

December 18, 2023

Pence, interrupted: How a comma undercut the then-VP's message to Trump

TOPICS: , , , , ,

“You know, I don’t think I have the authority to change the outcome.” That single line from former Vice President Mike Pence’s book “So Help Me God” contains what Pence reportedly told investigators is a serious punctuation error: the comma.

Pence was talking with Donald Trump on Christmas Day 2020 when he told the then-president either “You know, I don’t think I have the authority” or “You know I don’t think I have the authority.” According to ABC News, Pence told investigators looking into the Jan. 6 insurrection that what he really said was the no-comma version: that Trump knew that Pence didn’t believe he had the authority to change the outcome of the presidential election. But either Pence or one of his editors stuck a comma in there, changing the meaning of the sentence and offering a perfect example of just how important commas can be.

Commas have a number of jobs. They can separate coordinate nouns, like “We have a cat, a dog and a hamster.” They can separate coordinate adjectives, like “Our cat is cute, cuddly and playful.” They can separate whole clauses that are connected with a conjunction, like “Our cat is cute, but our dog is cuter.” They can set off a direct address, meaning when you call someone by a name, which is why “Let’s eat, Grandma” means something quite different from “Let’s eat Grandma.” They can separate nonrestrictive information, which means clauses that don’t influence the meaning of the noun: “The man, who was driving, was drunk” means there was just one man, but “The man who was driving was drunk” means you’re singling out the guy behind the wheel from some other guys.

In Pence’s book, the comma is doing yet another job: setting off an introductory clause. Here’s my recent column examining how that works.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

December 11, 2023

Happy holidays from the Smith's? How not to mess up names on holiday greetings

TOPICS: , , ,

Every year, people writing holiday greetings repeat the same mistakes: Merry Christmas from the Smith’s! Happy Holidays from the Wilson’s. We look forward to seeing you this year at Joe Gomez’ house. And on and on. So here’s my 2023 edition of how to make names plural, possessive and plural possessive in your holiday greetings.

Don’t use an apostrophe to form the plural of a family name. Clay and DeeDee Smith are the Smiths, not the Smith’s.

Don’t use an apostrophe to form the plural of a family name even if it ends in a vowel. Just because the plural name Mancinis looks like the last syllable should be pronounced “iss,” that’s no excuse for using an apostrophe. Ignore your ear and follow the rule: Add just an S to make plurals of last names ending in vowels. One Mancini, two Mancinis. One Popescu, a whole family of Popescus. One Cho, all the Chos.

Use and ES and no apostrophe to form the plural of a family name that ends in S, Ch, Sh, X or Z. “We’re visiting the Walshes this Christmas” is correct. Not “the Walsh’s.” “We’re traveling with the Williamses” is correct. Not “the Williams’s” or “the Williams’.” For these, it’s especially important to remember whether you want to make the name plural, possessive or both, because these names in possessive form get tricky. But to simply make plural a name ending in S or another of these letters, just add the ES: We love spending time with the Basses, the Gomezes and the Maddoxes.

Don’t change the spelling of a name that ends in Y. Berrys aren’t berries. They’re people whose last name is made plural the same way most names are: with just an S. The Quincys. The Murphys. The Zelenskys.

Don’t insert an apostrophe in front of an S that’s part of the name. If you’re writing a card to people with the last name of Williams, don’t talk about them as “the William’s.” Two people named James are never “the Jame’s.”

Form possessives of singular and plural names the same way you form possessives of singular and plural generic nouns. You already know to add an apostrophe plus an S to make most singular nouns possessive: the cat’s tail. You also know that if the noun is plural, you usually make it possessive with just an apostrophe placed after the plural S: the cats’ tails. Keep that in mind when writing possessives of proper names on holiday greetings. The house owned by the Smiths is the Smiths’ house. The party thrown by the Mangiones is the Mangiones’ party. Of course, if just one person named Mangione is throwing the party, it’s Bob Mangione’s party. But it’s those plural possessives that you have to watch out for.

Don’t make exceptions for names ending in X or Z. Outdated style books used to say that names ending in X or Z had their own set of rules for forming possessives. Not so. For singular possessives ending in X or Z, add apostrophe plus S: Donna Cox’s party. Paul Martinez’s house. For plural possessives ending in X or Z, first make plural by adding ES, then add the apostrophe on the end as you do for all plural possessives. The Coxes’ party. The Martinezes’ house.

Pick your style for forming possessives of singular proper names ending in S. Some rule-makers say that singular proper names that end in S form the possessive just like every other word: by adding an apostrophe and S: Mr. Jones’s hat. Others say to add just an apostrophe: Mr. Jones’ hat. Either way is fine. Just remember this applies only to singular names.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

December 4, 2023

Gift books for word lovers

TOPICS: , , , ,

For certain nerdy types (you know the ones), language books make great gifts. Unlike mysteries and memoirs that are quickly devoured in e-book form — then forgotten — informative, fun grammar and writing guides double as reference books. You can wrap one up and put it under the tree knowing your recipient will reach for it again and again for years to come.

Here’s my 2023 language book gift guide for every type of word nerd.

For the rule follower: Most people, even grammar savvy types, don’t know about usage guides. These reference books look like dictionaries, with alphabetized entries for words and language concepts. But instead of listing definitions, they offer expert insights on usage matters. Look under E to find a discussion of when “everyone” takes a singular or plural verb. Look under D to learn that a “double genitive” like “a friend of Joe’s” is not an error even though it doubles up on the possessives. Look under C to learn about “compose” and “comprise.” Two great usage guides for the grammar buff on your list: Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage and Garner’s Modern English Usage.

For the Grammar Girl fan: The most beloved grammar podcaster of all time, Mignon Fogarty has a new book out just in time for Secret Santas. In The Grammar Daily: 365 Quick Tips for Successful Writing from Grammar Girl, Fogarty delivers one easy, practical writing tip per day, every day for a year. On Day One, you’ll learn that the possessive of McDonald’s is McDonald’s. A few weeks later, you’ll learn that even though “anxious” usually carries a negative connotation, you can use it to mean “eager.”

Read about my other picks — Dreyer's English, Rebel With a Clause, the Curious Case of the Misplaced Modifier and Nine Nasty Wordshere in my recent column.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

November 27, 2023

'Said' vs. 'says' in quotation attributions

TOPICS: , , ,

Readers probably don’t care much whether an article or story attributes quotations with “says” or “said.” Nor do many care whether it comes before or after the name: said Jones, Jones said — it just doesn’t have a big effect on the reader.

Yet, to me, it’s becoming a bigger issue every day.

When I was first learning to edit, it was at a publication where very specific views on both matters reigned: The first was that newspaper writing should aim to be conversational — real-world language that doesn’t draw attention to itself but that downplays itself in order to emphasize the message.

That was the reason we put “said” after the name, unless there was a reason not to. In everyday conversation people don’t say things like, “Said my friend, mall parking is free.”

Regardless of the verb, English shows a strong preference for placing a verb after the subject in declarative sentences. So even though you could sometimes say, “Drove Gerald,” chances are you’ll always opt for “Gerald drove.”

As for “said” versus “says,” the former is usually more precise. “Says” is present tense and describes an ongoing action. So when you’re reporting something someone said in the past and just once, “said” is more logical.

So I edit according to these principles. And, the more I do, the more invested in them I become. It’s especially annoying to me that, when writing feature articles, many writers never, ever, ever put the “said” after the name. Every attribution is “said Wilson.”

Obviously, when a modifying noun or phrase follows the quotation attribution, "said" works best when it comes first:

… said Wilson, author of three math textbooks.

… said Wilson, the company’s president and CEO.

said Wilson, who saw the accident from his balcony.

In those cases, you need to place the modifying phrase next to the thing it modifies, "Wilson."

One more point about “said” and “says”: Consistency is important, but it shouldn’t trump logic. If you’re writing something using the “Wilson says” form, make "says" your default choice throughout, except when you want to emphasize that it was said in the past and just once. Likewise, if you’re writing in the “Wilson said” style, stick with “saids” everywhere unless you’re quoting something he says repeatedly.

Whatever you do, don’t get irked if an editor changes it. We can be a little rigid on this matter. Ahem.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

November 20, 2023

Phrasal verbs: You can look them up, but you can't look up them

TOPICS: , , ,

Can you back your hard drive up? Or must you back up your hard drive? Can you calm yourself down? Or must you calm down yourself? Can you blow balloons up? Or must you blow up balloons? Can you hang the phone up? Or must you hang up the phone? Can you keep the shenanigans up? Or do you keep up the shenanigans? Can you look the contract over? Or must you look over the contract?

And what if we replace all those nouns with pronouns? Like, for your hard drive: back it up or back up it? For balloons: blow them up or blow up them? For the phone: hang it up or hang up it? For the contract: look it over or look over it?

Like so many other aspects of English, phrasal verbs are easy to use but hard to understand. To use them, a native speaker can just follow their gut. You already know that if you’re helping a friend cope with a divorce, you’d say, “You’ll get over him” and not “You’ll get him over.” Yet, remarkably, you’d probably pick a different spot for the pronoun when suggesting she “think it over.”

A phrasal verb isn’t just a verb that teams up with a preposition. Instead, a phrasal verb is a two- or three-word combo that has at its head a verb and has a different meaning from the verb alone. For example, when you run out of a building, you’re not using a phrasal verb. You’re using “run” to mean “to move on your feet faster than walking.” So it has the same meaning with “out” as it does standing alone.

But “run out” is a phrasal verb when it means to exhaust a supply of something. When you say you run out of milk, you’re no longer talking about breaking into a jog. The meaning is different.
Learn more in my recent column.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

November 13, 2023

'Awhile' or 'a while'?

TOPICS: , , ,

To understand when “a while” is preferable to “awhile,” you need a firm grasp on grammar concepts most of us are never taught: the true nature of adverbs, how adverbs differ from adverbials and how prepositions work with objects. Yet people who never learned those concepts often get “a while” and “awhile” right anyway.

For example, when I do a Google search for “Let’s just wait for a while,” which is correct, I get about 470,000 hits. But when I search for “Let’s just wait for awhile,” which is wrong, I get fewer than 16,000 hits.

Here’s what most English speakers don’t know they know about “a while” and “awhile.”
For starters, we’re talking about different parts of speech. “A while” is a noun. Well, technically it’s a noun phrase because it has more than one word. But that’s splitting hairs. A noun phrase works just like a noun.

“Awhile” is an adverb. Contrary to what your third-grade teacher may have led you to believe, adverbs aren’t just those ly words that describe actions. Instead, an adverb answers the question “when?” “where?” or “in what manner?” Plus, sentence adverbs like “therefore” and “however” modify whole clauses or sentences. So if you look up “tomorrow” in a dictionary, you’ll see that it’s both a noun and an adverb. That makes sense because it answers the question “when?” Another example: “There” is also an adverb because it answers the question “where?” Sometimes, these rules for adverbs are a less intuitive, which is why it’s not completely clear that “awhile” answers the question “when?” But it deals with time the same way, so it’s an adverb.

“For” is a preposition. Prepositions take objects, which are always either nouns, pronouns or whole phrases or clauses working as nouns. So when you buy a gift “for Walter,” the noun “Walter” is the object of the preposition. If you’d rather say you’re buying a gift “for him,” the pronoun “him” is the object of the preposition.

Adverbs can’t be objects of prepositions. You can’t say “for quickly” or “at happily” or “with slowly.” And because “awhile” is an adverb, you can’t say “for awhile.” Only the noun form can go there: for a while.
You might guess that, if “awhile” can’t be used as a noun, then “a while” can’t be used as an adverb. So you’d surmise that “stay awhile” is correct and “stay a while” is wrong. Not so. The reason: adverbials. Here’s the full story in my recent column.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

November 6, 2023

'Chaise lounge' and 'chomping at the bit'?

TOPICS: , , ,

For years, every time I saw “chaise lounge” or “chomping at the bit” in an article I was editing, I changed it.

By traditional copy editor standards, they should be “chaise longue” and “champing at the bit.” Our name for the long chairs called chaises actually comes from the French, in which “chaise longue” literally means “long chair.” Yet for decades, careless American writers have glossed over that last word and assumed it was the English word “lounge.”

Likewise, “champing” isn’t a verb that comes up much these days. According to Webster’s New World College Dictionary, it means “to chew hard and noisily.” And, based on my experience as a kid hanging around horse stables, it’s the standard word for describing how horses chew. In my mind, it’s a horse-folk term.

Horses aren't a primary mode of transportation these days, so it makes sense that we’d be more comfortable with the idea of “chomping” than with the horse-centric “champing.”

But recently, I’ve started to feel funny about “fixing” them. When I do, I feel that I’m clinging to some bygone standard that is losing relevance by the minute. The “traditional” forms seem less realistic all the time.

A Google search confirms what my gut’s been telling me:

champing at the bit: 45,000 hits

chomping at the bit: 1.28 million hits

chaise longue: 24,600,000 hits

chaise lounge: 12,300,000 hits

It’s easy to see which way the tides are turning.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries

October 30, 2023

When not to capitalize job titles

TOPICS: ,

Most of us have bosses. And even long after the days when people were inclined to call a boss "Mr." anything, most of us nonetheless feel obligated to show them a little deference. 

I suppose that’s why so many copywriters and even features writers think that the titles of company bigwigs must be capitalized in every circumstance.

 Joseph Jeeves is the President and Chief Operating Officer.

 Mary Jessup is the Executive Vice President in Charge of International Mergers and E-Commerce Manager.

I long ago lost my ability to be objective about all the things that may be wrong with that approach. Instead, my measured opinion on all this caps is a straightforward “yuck.”

 Professional publishing doesn’t like using this many caps. So, if you want your writing to look like something in a professionally written publication, neither should you. The easiest thing to do is just to never capitalize them at all. But if you want to emulate the news media, consider the Associated Press Stylebook's recommendation:

"In general, confine capitalization to formal titles used directly before an individual’s name," but, "lowercase and spell out titles when they are not used with an individual’s name: The president issued a statement. The pope gave his blessing.

“Lowercase and spell out titles in constructions that set them off from a name by commas: The vice president, Nelson Rockefeller, declined to run again.

 In other words, when there are commas separating it from the name, it’s not part of the name. You’re not saying Vice President Nelson Rockefeller. You’re saying: The vice president, who is named Nelson Rockefeller.

The bottom line: To make your writing look professional, avoid capitals whenever possible, and resist the urge to pay homage to anyone with capitalization like: Nelson Rockefeller, Former Vice President of These United States, Distinguished Gentleman, and Exceedingly Wealthy Individual.

Click player above to listen to the podcast

« Older Entries