gwyn: (willow pronoun)
gwyn ([personal profile] gwyn) wrote2005-06-17 09:32 am
Entry tags:

Spelling rulz!

What's this? A usage post?! OMG, you might say, that thing I friended this stupid cow for in the first place and that she's completely abandoned doing. But this one is something light and breezy because basically I haven't got the brain power to make something more complex. Spelling rules! The bane of everyone's existence.

I've already addressed the issue of homophones/homonyms/whatever the hell you want to call those words that mix everyone up (your/you're, their/they're/there) and so on, except I can't link to that frackin' post because the memories function isn't working in LJ today, apparently. But most people are also confused by the basic rules of spelling -- making plurals, the whole i before e thing, when to keep an e with a suffix, when not to, that sorta thing.

When we were kids, we got the "I before E, except after C" rule drummed into our heads, but the problem with that is that most of the time they left off the most important part of the equation -- "or when sounded like ay, as in neighbor and weigh." Gosh, that one would have been helpful to know! The other big issue with this little mnemonic, of course, is that it's not bulletproof -- there are a bunch of exceptions, which only serves to confuse people more.
I before E: relieve, believe, sieve (I always spell this wrong, because I have a brain like one, really), niece, fierce and so on
E before I receive, deceive, sleigh, freight, eight, etc.
the annoying exceptions: seize (another one I cannot spell right, because I confuse it with sieve above), either, weird, height, foreign, leisure

This is one place where spellcheckers are definitely recommended -- you won't run into homophone problems with these words for the most part, so if you have trouble, and can't even remember them well enough to look them up, definitely run your spellcheck program to find these. I think, also, that they would be the least likely words (in some cases) to get people on your ass about your bad spelling, simply because most people won't even catch them while reading, nor will most betas. I can't count how much stuff I've read where the author glowingly thanked her fantastic betas, who pretty much missed all the ie combo words, not to mention a lot of other obvious stuff.

But what to do about that stupid E hanging off of certain words, when you change the word in a sentence by adding a suffix? For instance, you've got desire, but then someone desir(e)ing, or gentle and gentl(e)ness -- what do you do with it? the rule for this one (and of course there are exceptions) is that you drop a silent e when you add a suffix that begins with a vowel; keep the final e if the suffix starts with a consonant.
Bodie never thought Doyle was a prude, but he was acting rather prudish with that pole dancer.
The care at that hospital was usually top-notch, but Dr. Carter wasn't very careful with his patients.

Some exceptions to try to remember: changeable, judgment (I have no idea why we spell it without the e in this country, but we do, and it's stupid, but there it is), argument, and truly.

How do you add an -s or -ed to words that end in y? The rule here is that most often, you'll change that -y to an i if it's preceded by a consonant, but not when it's proceeded by a vowel.
For a situation comedy, Friends is pretty good, but I don't usually like comedies.
Crockett knew how to play the drug dealers' games, but this time, they played him.

Proper names are an exception here: if the name ends in y, you wouldn't change it to an -i if you were making a plural: I had a crush on David Cassidy, but that didn't mean I thought all the Cassidys were hot.

Here's one rule that trips me up all the time, and one I'm reluctant to include just because it's ridiculously convoluted: if a final consonant is preceded by a single vowel, and the consonant ends a one-syllable word or a stressed syllable, then you double the consonant when adding a suffix that begins with a vowel. I cannot ever remember how to do occurrence, for instance, because I always have to spell it out in my head -- occur has one r, but occurrence has two. Other examples: Jack would have bet (single-syllable word) that Daniel wasn't a betting man. Wes wasn't afraid to commit (that second syllable is normally stressed) to someone, but right then, he wasn't in a committed relationship. This is a tough one to remember, but you can usually find the answer in a good dictionary. Few people are ever likely to have to take spelling tests, as I do, but if you can get this one right, you're way ahead of me!

So, how do you know when to add just -s to a plural of a regular old noun, or -es? For most things, you'll only need to add an -s: table-tables, computer-computers, TV-TVs, etc. (notice no apostrophe on TVs). But if your noun ends in -s, -sh, -ch, or -x, then you use the -es form: church-churches, ax-axes, wish-wishes, and so on. Words ending in -o tend to trip people up, too, when it comes to making them plural. The rule here is usually to add an just a lil' -s if the o is preceded by a vowel, and -es when it's preceded by a consonant.
I'm making a vid to Holding Out for a Hero with Bodie and Doyle as my heroes.
Video may have killed the radio star, but I'll take videos over radios any day.

The last one that trips people up because they aren't familiar with the rules is how to pluralize hyphenated compound words. Here, you add that plural -s onto the chief word in your compound: One mother-in-law is enough, I don't need two mothers-in-law. This also applies to words like attorneys general, and courts martial -- you're pluralizing the noun (the particular thing or person you're talking about), not the descriptor.

None of these are, as you can tell, simple rules. And rules have a habit of disappearing from our memory when we most need them. But if you're stuck, go for a dictionary or run a spellchecker, and you'll be way ahead of most of the people around you. Foreign spellings of plurals or words like judgement might not show up in a US checker, but most of the rules still apply.
ext_8787: (Maxine)

[identity profile] deejay.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 06:57 pm (UTC)(link)
Ow. My brain hurts. And I still can't manage to grasp the general rule about making things plural (or possessive) if the word or name ends in "s" - like, just for instance:

This stuff belongs to Angus. Thus, is this stuff Angus' or Angus's or the-stuff-of-Angus?

There is more than one Angus in a room: Anguses? Angusi?

Apostrophes, alas, are not my friend.



Re:

[identity profile] gwyn-r.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 07:01 pm (UTC)(link)
This is all addressed in one my first posts. Unfortunately, memories don't seem to work right now. But when they do, just go to my memories section and all of this is there.
ext_8787: (goodycat)

Re:

[identity profile] deejay.livejournal.com 2005-06-18 10:13 pm (UTC)(link)
Yay, 'k, thanks!

[identity profile] callherblondie.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 07:14 pm (UTC)(link)
I'd love to have your input on this:
When you are writing the possessive form of someone's proper name and their name ends in an S, what do you do? For example, is it "Weiss' hand" or "Weiss's hand"
???
I've seen people say the former is correct and I've seen people say that the latter is more correct. I am terribly confused. I always used the former, but recently I've started using the latter since several people have told me that is the right way. Or does it not really matter as long as you are consistent and stick with one?

[identity profile] callherblondie.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 07:16 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, sorry, I neglected to read the comments before making mine. I'll check out your memories. Thanks!

[identity profile] gwyn-r.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 08:01 pm (UTC)(link)
One of the reasons I started doing this was because I'd talked about this kind of stuff on the LJ before, and people kept asking me to explain more. I didn't want to do tutorials, because there are enough out there, and there are much better, more comprehensive books that I think people should get if they want to do more, better. But the thing I was good at was blowing away the myths and misconceptions about this stuff -- it's astonishing how much information is taught to us in school as "correct" when it's in fact incredibly wrong, and not even logically based, either. The apostrophe s on names ending in s is one and that's why it was one of my earliest posts -- I gave a little history on it in that post, because it was started as a way to save space in newspapers in the laster part of the 19th century. So the idea that it's correct is just laughable.

Sadly, what happens in most cases -- and I discuss this in my peeves post -- is that personal pet peeves are passed on to us by teachers, so we go on in the face of new information clinging to our little peeves, insisting they're "correct." This apostrophe s one is the worst, in my opinion. I started out thinking, like most editors, that I knew everything. I've since learned I knew almost nothing, and that most people think they know stuff, too, and never really get the chance like I did to learn just how much they still have to learn.

[identity profile] kadymae.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 07:44 pm (UTC)(link)
Gwyn, have you ever thought of taking your grammar posts, given them a dusting/tweaking, and going semi-pro with them? A dedicated website? Possible publication/syndication?

[identity profile] gwyn-r.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 09:11 pm (UTC)(link)
People have mentioned that to me before. Some have even cheerleaded a book idea. I just can't see anyone being interested in this, except the few people who've friended me for it. I honestly feel like most people don't care, and the ones who do... they'll got buy something like Diana Hacker's excellent book! It's hard for me to imagine their being much of an interest, even here.
ext_9063: (Analucia 42F by teh_indy)

[identity profile] mlyn.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 07:50 pm (UTC)(link)
I so wished I could've called you for this advice last week, when someone was presenting their final project in my Typography class and we all had an argument about the plural of "Bush." As in George W. Finally someone googled "bush plural" and found the answer at Get It Write.com.

I'm glad to actually see the rule, though!

Next up: which is correct? Using "women" or "woman" as an adjective for an occupation, or using "female"? I grind my teeth every time I hear "woman cop" or "woman lawyer," but it seems to be perfectly acceptable these days.

[identity profile] dine.livejournal.com 2005-06-17 09:42 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm making a vid to Holding Out for a Hero with Bodie and Doyle as my heroes.

I know this was a throwaway example, but I would seriously adore that vid.

and thanks muchly for including the info on pluralizing hyphenated compound words. that's one thing that many people get wrong wrong wrong; and for some reason it grates harder on me than other common grammatical errors.

[identity profile] zebra363.livejournal.com 2005-06-18 12:48 am (UTC)(link)
notice no apostrophe on TVs

No apostrophe for years or ages either, right?

Mag 7 is set in the 1860s or 1870s
She is in her 60s

You see these with an apostrophe so often that they almost look wrong to me without one.

[identity profile] keiko-kirin.livejournal.com 2005-06-20 04:01 pm (UTC)(link)
occur has one r, but occurrence has two

This word always gives me grief! I'm so glad you mentioned it. Maybe now I'll remember it if I can associate it with your usage post. You're convincing me to use spellcheck, even though I hate it because it flags words like "stargate" and some rude words commonly used in slash.

I'm making a vid to Holding Out for a Hero with Bodie and Doyle as my heroes.

Oh, you! I thought it was going to be Total Eclipse of the Heart... *coff*