March 2008 - Editors` Association of Canada

march 2008
WEST COAST EDITOR
NEWSLETTER OF THE BC BRANCH OF THE EDITORS ’ ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
THE
GREAT
DEBATES
serial comma vote: the results
who cares about whom?
clash of the punctuation titans
the tale of the dastardly dash
EAC - BC is a proud supporter of the serial comma
WEST COAST EDITOR
EDITOR’S VIEW
March 2008
West Coast Editor is the newsletter of
Editors’ Association of Canada, BC Branch
(EAC-BC). It is published eight times a
year: September, October, November,
January, February, March, April, and May.
Views expressed in these pages do not
necessarily reflect those of EAC or EAC-BC.
PUBLISHER
Editors’ Association of Canada, BC Branch
MAILING ADDRESS
P.O. Box 1688, Bentall Centre Post Office
Vancouver, BC V6C 2P7
604-681-7184
bc@editors.ca
BRANCH COORDINATOR
Jean Lawrence: bc@editors.ca
WEBSITE ADDRESS
www.editors.ca/bc
WEBMASTER
Derek K. Miller: dkmiller@penmachine.com
EDITORIAL
Editor: Cheryl Hannah, channah@editors.ca
House Writer: Cheryl Hannah; Copy
Editors: Jennifer Getsinger, Julie Harwood;
Proofreaders: Christine Dudgeon,
Kelly Eng, Hugh Macdonald
Contributors: Barbara Dominik, Ricki Ewings,
Pamela Findling, Gary Lund, Christine
McPhee, Peter Moskos, Kathy Sinclair
Photography and Design: Cheryl Hannah
EDITORS’ ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
BC BRANCH EXECUTIVE 2007–2008
Chair:
Daphne Sams: bcchair@editors.ca
BC Branch Representative:
Dania Sheldon: bc@editors.ca
Hotline Coordinators:
Barbara Dominik, Regan Truscott:
bchotline@editors.ca
Membership/Outreach Chair:
Sue Ansell: bcmembership@editors.ca
Professional Development Co-chairs:
Ricki Ewings, Christine McPhee:
bcworkshops@editors.ca
Programs Co-chairs:
Gary Lund, Peter Moskos:
bcprograms@editors.ca
Public Relations Co-chairs:
Jeanne Ainslie, Wendy Harris:
bcpr@editors.ca
Secretary:
Karen Reppin: bcsecretary@editors.ca
Social Chair:
Dania Sheldon: bc@editors.ca
Treasurer:
Shelly Windover: bc@editors.ca
Welcome to the March 2008 issue of West Coast Editor. This issue is all about
you: you and your style preferences. Forget what Chicago calls for or what
your clients demand. What do you want? Do you want serial commas roaming
unleashed all over your page? Or do you prefer the clean lines of a serial-commafree page? And how do you feel about apostrophes? Colons? Semi-colons?
Hyphens? Relative pronouns? Take a stand. Declare your allegiances.
In this issue you’ll find “Who Cares about Whom?” (page 9), an article in which
Frances Peck ponders the longevity of the relative pronoun whom and you’ll find
“Clash of the Punctuation Titans” (page 8), an “interview” in which Gertrude
Stein and Lynne Truss flatly disagree over the value of apostrophes, commas,
colons, and semicolons. You’ll also find “The Tale of the Dastardly Dash” (page
5), a punctuation-related fairytale by columnist Hugh Macdonald.
Finally, on pages 6–7 you’ll find the results of West Coast Editor’s vote on the
serial comma. When we first decided to stage the vote we never dared hope
so many of you would respond. But respond you did. Since voting opened on
February 7, 2008, 134 of you have voted: almost 46% of EAC-BC membership.
Wow! BC editors are passionate about their serial commas!
And prolific. Along with your votes, many of you included commentaries
explaining your feelings about the controversial comma. In fact, we’ve received
so many commentaries that we don’t have enough space to print them all in this
issue. As a result, we’ve decided to print half of them this month and half next
month.
So if you haven’t yet had a chance to cast your vote, you’re in luck: it’s not too
late. We have extended the voting deadline until April 16, 2008. Please send your
votes—and your commentaries—to westcoasteditor@editors.ca.
FEATURE WRITERS
Hugh Macdonald (“The Tale of
the Dastardly Dash,” page 5) is a
poet, playwright, and editor. He is
also a jack of miscellaneous trades,
having worked as a technical writer, a
methods analyst, and a writer of puff
pieces for a weekly newspaper. He
is currently editing a series of online
training courses and is writing his
second play as well as the occasional
new poem.
Since his first conversation with a
stranger on June 15, 1949, he has
been obsessed with saying what is
meant and meaning what is said.
Frances Peck (“Who Cares about
Whom?” page 9) is an editor,
writer, and instructor with more
than 20 years’ editorial experience.
She prepared the Canadian edition
of The St. Martin’s Workbook, a
grammar exercise book, and recently
completed Peck’s English Pointers,
an e-book for the Translation Bureau.
A member of West Coast Editorial
Associates, Frances teaches editing
with the Print Futures program
(Douglas College) and the Writing
and Publishing program (Simon
Fraser University).
West Coast Editor Co-chairs:
Cheryl Hannah, Hugh Macdonald:
westcoasteditor@editors.ca
2 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008
Cover: “The Debaters,” Cheryl Hannah, December 2007
No Space
AtfirstEuropeanlanguagesdidnotinsert
spacesbetweenwords. Fortunately,
by the 8th century AD people had
discovered just how useful a little
white space could be.
“This innovation is believed to
have led to silent reading. ‘One is
tempted to compare the introduction
of the space as a word boundary
to the invention of the zero in
mathematics…’ Roy Harris (1986).
Modern texts omit word spaces only
for special effects.”
Fear Not
“
”
Fear not those who argue but those who dodge.
Marie Ebner von Eschenbach, Aphorisms, 1905
Source: http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Marie_Ebner_von_Eschenbach/, accessed March 3, 2008
Facebook receives recognition
Social networking site Facebook will appear as both a trademarked noun and a verb
in the latest edition of the Collins English Dictionary. According to The Vancouver
Sun, the listing will feature the following example: “I thought one of the interviewees
was perfect for the job, until I Facebooked him.”
Source: Arts & Life, The Vancouver Sun, Friday, December 21, 2007
Source: Accomodating Brocolli in the
Cemetary: or why can’t anybody spell?,
Vivian Cook, 2005
Put it in the Trash
Had you recently ridden the New York
subway, you would have seen the sign
“Please put it in a trash can; that’s
good news for everyone.” The person
responsible for this proclamation of
semicolon support was Neil Neches,
marketing manager for New York City
Transit Authority. As you can see below,
Mr. Neche and his semicolon have
received top marks from grammar and
style cognoscenti.
curios
Drive-by Editing
A “burgeoning of punctuational literacy
in unlikely places.”
Spotted in front of a private residence in the Vancouver East Side
Geoffrey Nunberg (author and linguistics professor
at University of California, Berkeley)
“The semicolon is correct, though I’d
have used a colon, which I think would
be a bit more sophisticated in that
sentence.”
Allan M. Siegal (author of The New York Times
Manual of Style and Usage, Revised and Expanded
Edition, 2002)
“I suppose Bush would claim it’s the
effect of No Child Left Behind.”
Noam Chomsky (author of Language and Mind,
3rd edition, 2006)
Source: “Celebrating the Semicolon in a
Most Unlikely Location,” Sam Roberts, http:
//www.nytimes.com/2008/02/18/nyregion/
18semicolon.html?_r=1&oref=slogin, February
2008, accessed February 27, 2008
Photograph by Barbara Dominik, February 2008
March 2008 WEST COAST EDITOR
3
Perfect Wheels contest:
honourable mention
EDITOR’S INBOX
Perfect Wheels contest:
prize-winning entry
Here’s my entry for the ideal editorial
transportation. Great idea! I nominate
the 2007 Norco Plateau bicycle. Its
step-through frame, fenders, and
chain guard enable the editor to ride
in business attire in style. The back
rack and panniers provide ample
space for a laptop and manuscripts.
Plus: you’ll slash your gas bill
(though your bakery expenses may
rise); you’ll get a mental and physical
boost; and clients will be impressed
by your commitment to go green.
The newsletter is looking great—keep
it up. Maybe the next contest could
be “The Perfect Shoe.”
Kathy Sinclair,
Vancouver
Congratulations, Kathy! We loved your
choice of the Norco Plateau bike as the
“perfect wheels” for environmentally
minded editors. We hope you like your
new pica ruler! —Ed.
Perfect Wheels contest:
honourable mention
I believe that the perfect auto for a
photojournalist is a crossover called
the “Chevrolet HHR.” It looks
like a 1949 Chevy panel truck (the
vintage look appeals to the mature
writer) and has many covered storage
compartments for photography
equipment.
It also has space for all the luggage
photojournalists need when travelling
to photo shoots and interview
locations.
Gary Lund,
Vancouver
Interested in seeing a photograph of
Gary’s perfect wheels? Go to http://
gm.ca/gm/english/vehicles/chevrolet/
hhr/overview —Ed.
Here’s my contribution for the
quintessential (if not ideal) editor’s
car.
I suggest the ideal car for editors
would be a Borgward from the late
50s or early 60s of the previous
century. I knew two people who had
one, and each would say frequently,
“It needs work.” Editors tend to
say the same thing when presented
with manuscripts. One of these
acquaintances kept two additional
Borgwards in his back yard for spare
parts. This is the editorial equivalent
of working on Draft Three with
Drafts One and Two retained in the
filing cabinet, “just in case.”
If memory serves, Borgward owners
tended to abandon their objects
of affection eventually for other,
more reliable cars, just as editors
sometimes abandon tediously
unprofitable clients for better ones.
Hugh Macdonald,
Delta
Interested in seeing a picture of
Hugh’s quintessential wheels? Go
to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Borgward —Ed.
Winning wheels: Editor Kathy Sinclair shows off her eco-friendly Norco Plateau bike and her beribboned pica ruler, as well as her “One Less Car” bumper sticker.
4 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008
THE TALE OF THE DASTARDLY DASH
A punctuation fairytale.
BY HUGH MACDONALD
Once upon a time, there lived the comma, colon, period, exclamation point, question mark, apostrophe, quotation mark,
quotation mark for quotations within quotations, four different types of brackets,1 and the hyphen. And they all lived happily
together. There were also other dashes—the em dash and the en dash—which printers used sparingly and people with
typewriters2 attempted to replicate by pounding out double hyphens.
The hyphen—that most modest of all dashes—occupied a special niche which it attained with the invention of movable type
and the early-modern printing press. It was used to break words at a logical syllabic point at the end of lines. It was also used
to clarify meaning in certain word strings (e.g., “huge garage-sale” as opposed to “huge garage sale”3).
But all that changed.
Suddenly, the em dash dashed from the head of Zeus to a prominence only equalled by the ellipsis at the end of emails and
text messages. It declared victory over the punctuation world, dashed its erstwhile friends to the bottom of the page, and rode
roughshod over their bodies.4
Before all this happened, most people had known dash as a short foot race, a modicum of something one threw into a stew to
enhance its gustatory appeal, a small bribe in certain pidgins of our language, or even as a synonym for flare. They cried with
alarm when they were suddenly confronted with the em dash as colon, parentheses—or sometimes both in the same sentence if
the writer wasn’t concerned with how hard the reader was going to work at decoding the screed.
Even people who surrounded themselves with style guides in an attempt to ward off the em dash found themselves falling
victim to its dastardly tactics. Recently, a senior member of the Punctuation Protection League—a.k.a. the Editors’
Association of Canada—wrote a sentence that ended with a bulleted list. Unwittingly, he used a colon to introduce the list,
little thinking that the way the sentence was structured would leave it vulnerable to the em dash. Sadly, he was either too
rushed—or too tired—to come up with an elegant rewrite. The em dash—sensing his weakened state—dashed in with an offer
he couldn’t refuse—use me, and you’ll have time to play cribbage instead of dashing your poor brains out looking for a better
way to write this sentence.
And so, the dastardly dash dashed the hapless editor into dashing his principles into the bin as he dashed off to the waiting
cribbage board.
–19–
Author Notes
1
2
3
4
(parentheses), [square], {curly or brace}, <angle or chevron>
A primitive device requiring the user to smash keys with brutal force in order to replicate letters of the alphabet on a sheet
of paper. Later models had electric keys which required less force. Many people under 25 have never seen one. For them,
I suggest trying the following conceptual exercise to understand how far we have come in our ability to produce words by
smacking small keys on a rectangular board—first consider the evolution of weaponry over the last 2.5 million years. Now,
group the manual typewriter with the stone axe; the electric typewriter with the bow and arrow—or possibly the single shot
musket; the modern computer keyboard with the machine gun.
I know this is a rather prosaic—i.e., boring—example; but the only other one I could think of was not sufficiently dignified
for a professional journal.
Who can resist the irresistible mixaphor?
March 2008 WEST COAST EDITOR
5
SERIAL COMMA VOTE: THE RESULTS
The first of the serial comma commentaries to land in the West Coast Editor inbox...
From: Elizabeth Rains
Subject: For
I like Lynne Truss’s rationale. Even though I’m a die-hard
defender of CP in everything else, I’ll take the comma.
From: Carol Zhong
Subject: For
I’m for the serial comma. Omitting it can result in ambiguity
or misreading.
From: Patricia Tate
Subject: For
For—because it adds clarity.
From: Julie Cheng
Subject: Doesn’t matter as long as you’re consistent...
…and follow your style guide. Also
consider the purpose of your document. If,
for instance, you’re writing for a catalogue,
you might be short on space, and one or
two commas will make a difference.
From: Christine Laurin
Subject: For
Only for non-fiction.
From: Colin Thomas
Subject: FOR
And I love the “proud supporters” slogan.
If editors and writers leave out commas, how will they learn
correct use of semicolons? I am not in favor of overuse of
commas, like around the word “too”. I too am in favor of
fewer commas, but insist on serial commas. (Larger or longer
appositives do need them.)
I would also like to support the use of a comma in any
sentence where the reader pauses momentarily (especially
if reading out loud), as where the structure of the sentence
changes, but not enough to consider the second part a
complete clause (where semicolon or
period is appropriate). No one uses
parallel structure all the time.
For: 113
Against: 17
Doesn’t matter: 2
Only as required: 1
Abstain: 1
From: Frances Peck
Subject: Against
In a list, commas replace “and.” Then why, oh why, use a
comma and an “and” at the end? The serial comma is simply
redundant. Once in a while we need one for clarity, but the
“no serial comma” practice allows for that.
From: Gail Buente
Subject: FOR!
I’ve seen innumerable instances where the meaning of a
sentence was confusing because the serial comma wasn’t
used. And, really, it takes up very little space!
From: Jennifer Getsinger
Subject: FOR the serial comma
Serial commas are good: parallel structure; pause in voice
when reading; Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences uses them
(my biggest client); it looks awkward in a text where serial
commas are not used, and then in a place where more clarity
is required, it is necessary in order to avoid ambiguity, and
6 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008
then it looks inconsistent; and also it is similar in structure,
but lower level than, serial semicolons—try leaving out the
final semicolon in a long, complex sentence like this one!
Geological descriptions can be ambiguous if serial commas
are not used.
I have read many books out loud to
my children, and it has heightened my
appreciation of well placed commas.
Those books include The Lord of the
Rings (yes, all of it), at least 5 Harry
Potter books, Moby-Dick, several
Arthur Ransome stories, Captains
Courageous (I’m afraid this one
bogs down after a while), and The
Bartimaeus Trilogy. By the way, I had
no idea Melville was such a humorist until I read MobyDick out loud, at a slow enough pace to appreciate not only
his poetic lyrical sentences, but also his very funny satirical
passages cloaked in academic-speak. (I don’t like the hyphen
in Moby-Dick, but there is a photo of the first edition on
Wikipedia and it is clearly original. For all we know, the
name itself is a big joke).
If a book is difficult to read aloud, such as those horrid
Goosebumps books for young people, then I don’t consider it
well written.
I suppose “out loud” is an Americanism for “aloud”—will
look it up some day. (As in, For crying out loud!)
From: Matthea Orr
Subject: For
The serial comma clearly marks the end of a list, especially
when the items within are longer (e.g. includes prepositions
or conjunctions).
From: Jerry Eberts
Subject: Against!
The serial comma is an unnecessary and ugly blot on the
page wherever it is used. It assumes the reader is an idiot.
The low intelligence of the reader should never be assumed
(unless one is editing an intragovernmental publication).
From: Sara Boddy
Subject: FOR!!!!!!!!!!!
Because it absolutely adds clarity!!! I wish I could vote 100
times!
From: Lynn Kisilenko
Subject: For
There are times when the last two items in a list might be
seen as one. Putting in the serial comma makes it clear that
there are two items.
From: Claudette Upton
Subject: FOR
If it’s ever needed for clarity, it should always be used. Many
BC editors have heard my favourite example of the need for
a serial comma: “I owe all that I am to my parents, Ayn Rand
and God.”
From: Carla Braun
Subject: For
The serial comma prevents potential ambiguity. It’s easy to
figure out how to use it. And best of all, the word “serial”
brings to mind “serial killer,” which makes using it as
exciting as watching CSI.
From: Colleen Anderson
Subject: AGAINST
However, it is needed in sentences if the meaning would be
unclear.
From: Wanda Power
Subject: For
The serial comma can look superfluous on the page, because
we don’t see a lot of it lately. But read these two sentences
aloud:
I need to buy apples, oranges, and tomatoes.
I need to buy apples and oranges.
In the first sentence, there is a slight pause before the “and.”
And I do add a comma-long pause when I read that sentence
aloud, whether or not that comma is on the page. In the
second sentence, the reader wouldn’t normally pause before
the “and” and so there is no comma.
Punctuation is supposed to help the written word capture the
rhythms of speech, and the serial comma does that.
From: Norma Miller
Subject: Against!
Who needs the clutter?
From: Ian Hanington
Subject: For
It eliminates any potential ambiguity.
From: Melodie Anderson
Subject: FOR
I am in full support of the serial comma. It adds clarity and
balance.
From: Patricia Graca
Subject: For
I support the use of the serial comma for the sake of clarity,
simplicity, and consistency. Using the serial comma all
the time negates the need for exceptions—and rules for
exceptions always add confusion.
From: Betty Taylor
Subject: For
I like the serial comma because it clarifies that the
penultimate item is in the list and not part of the last item.
However, it’s no big deal with me—I will not change it if that
is the only change to be made.
From: Julia Cochrane
Subject: FOR
It removes ambiguity, and it looks better. Not having it looks
asymmetric to me.
From: Chantal Carstens
Subject: For
I’m more for it than against it. While I don’t think we need
it before the conjunction in a short and simple list, the serial
comma is useful when the elements in the series are long and
complex.
From: Peter Moskos
Subject: It doesn’t matter
It doesn’t matter, as long as you are consistent.
From: Jay Draper
Subject: For
(I wish I could vote more than once!)
From: Joyce Gram
Subject: For!
Because it adds clarity, prevents ambiguity, and is elegant. I
can’t wait for the results.
From: Sheila Protti
Subject: For
See Editing Canadian English, 2nd Edition, 5.5, pp. 58–59.
The serial comma avoids misinterpretation and ambiguity. It
also prevents confusion when listing items in a series.
March 2008 WEST COAST EDITOR
7
CLASH OF THE PUNCTUATION TITANS
Gertrude Stein and Lynne Truss square off over all things punctuation related.
Below you will find an “interview”
with two titans of punctuation:
the zero-tolerance proponent of
punctuation Lynne Truss and the
stream-of-consciousness über-enemy
of punctuation Gertrude Stein. The
interview is the brainchild of my
fevered imagination. It is fabricated.
It is biased. It also plays havoc with
chronology since Ms. Stein died nine
years before Ms. Truss was born. —Ed.
WCE: I’d like to start things off, Ms.
Stein, by asking you your thoughts
about punctuation.
GS: There are some punctuations that
are interesting and there are some
punctuations that are not….
WCE: Hmmm. And you, Ms. Truss?
LT: I don’t know how bad things are
in America, but in the UK I cannot
emphasize it enough: standards of
punctuation are abysmal.…The reason
to stand up for punctuation is that
without it there is no reliable way of
communicating meaning. Punctuation
herds words together, keeps others
apart.
WCE: How do you feel about the
apostrophe? Is it losing ground as a
legitimate punctuation mark?
LT: …the tractable apostrophe
has always done its proper jobs
in our language with enthusiasm
and elegance, but it has never been
taken seriously enough; its talent for
adaptability has been cruelly taken
for granted; and now, in an age of
supreme graphic frivolity, we pay
the price. Too many jobs have been
heaped on this tiny mark, and—far
from complaining—the apostrophe has
seemingly requested “More weight,”
just like that martyrish old codger in
Arthur Miller’s The Crucible, when
religious bigots in black hats with
8 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008
buckles on are subjecting him to death
by crushing.
GS: Well feel as you like about
that, I can see and I do see that for
many that for some the possessive
case apostrophe has a gentle tender
insinuation that makes it very difficult
to definitely decide to do without it.
One does do without it, I do, I mostly
always do, but I cannot deny that
from time to time I feel myself having
regrets and from time to time I put it in
to make the possessive case.
WCE: Well said, Ms. Stein. Is there
any truth to the rumour that you
harbour dark feelings about commas?
GS: I do not now care whether you put
them in or not but for a long time I felt
very definitely about them and would
have nothing to do with them.… A
comma by helping you along holding
your coat for you and putting on your
shoes keeps you from living your life as
actively as you should lead it….
And what does a comma do, a comma
does nothing but make easy a thing
that if you like it enough is easy
enough without the comma. A long
complicated sentence should force itself
upon you, make you know yourself
knowing it and the comma, well at the
most a comma is a poor period that it
lets you stop and take a breath but if
you want to take a breath you ought to
know yourself that you want to take a
breath.…
LT: More than any other mark, the
comma draws our attention to the
mixed origins of modern punctuation,
and its consequent mingling of
two quite distinct functions: 1. To
illuminate the grammar of a sentence
[and] 2. To point up—rather in the
manner of musical notation—such
literary qualities as rhythm, direction,
pitch, tone, and flow.
This is why grown men have knockdown fights over the comma in editorial
offices: because these two roles of
punctuation sometimes collide headon—indeed, where the comma is
concerned, they do it all the time.
WCE: Some people think colons and
semicolons old-fashioned. What do you
think?
GS: There are two different ways of
thinking about colons and [semicolons]
you can think of them as commas
and as such they are purely servile or
you can think of them as periods and
then using them can make you feel
adventurous.
LT: Are the colon and semicolon oldfashioned? No, but they are old. The
first printed semicolon was the work
of good old Aldus Manutius just two
years after Columbus sailed to the
New World.… Expectation is what
these stops are about; expectation and
elastic energy. Like internal springs,
they propel you forward in a sentence
towards more information, and the
essential difference between them is
that while the semicolon lightly propels
you in any direction related to the
foregoing (“Whee! Surprise me!”), the
colon nudges you along lines already
subtly laid down. How can such useful
marks be optional, for heaven’s sake?
GS: I really do not think so…. They
are more powerful more imposing more
pretentious than a comma but they
are a comma all the same. They really
have within them deeply within them
fundamentally within them the comma
nature.
Editor Notes
GS excerpts taken from Lectures in America,
Gertrude Stein, 1935, pages 214–216, 218–
221. LT excerpts taken from Eats, Shoots
& Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to
Punctuation, Lynne Truss, 2003, pages XX,
20, 36–37, 70–71, 111, 114.
WHO CARES ABOUT WHOM?
Of marbled murrelets and relative pronouns...
BY FRANCES PECK
Whom is the marbled murrelet of the grammar world—little known and seldom seen, but championed by a passionate few for
whom preserving this endangered pronoun is a heartfelt cause.
To the average ear, whom has about it a whiff of pomposity, an air of know-it-all snobbishness, that makes it as unlikely
as a top hat at a hockey game. And besides sounding weird, whom (an object) is for many impossible to sort out from who
(a subject). Little wonder that most people glide easily through life ignoring the word entirely, except in the most familiar
phrases, like “to whom it may concern.”
All of this leads a sensible English practitioner to wonder, why bother with whom?
That question haunted Theodore M. Bernstein, former New York Times editor and eminent language authority who is on
record as saying, “I favor whom’s doom except after a preposition.” In fact, the usually punctilious Bernstein decided that
personally dismissing the word was not enough; he’d stop at nothing less than banishing whom from the English language.
Thus began Bernstein’s renowned “doom whom” campaign. Humorist Bill Bryson (himself no slouch in the language
department) writes in Bryson’s Dictionary of Troublesome Words that Bernstein canvassed twenty-five usage gurus in 1975 to
see if they thought whom was worth preserving, except after a preposition. Six voted to keep the word, four were undecided,
and fifteen said dump it.
Hardly a ringing endorsement. Yet whom is still with us. Why is it so tenacious? Why has it not obligingly exited the language
like its fusty cronies thee and thou?
It’s not that English grammar is resistant to change. After all, we’ve toppled once steadfast rules like “never split an infinitive”
and “never end a sentence with a preposition.” Then why are so many editors, writers, and other language professionals intent
on preserving a word that’s been slipping out of usage with—let’s face it—little fanfare or consequence?
I wonder if there’s something more subtle, and more human, than dry old grammar going on here.
As far as parts of speech go, who and whom are in the same family as which, that, what, and so on: they’re relative pronouns.
Yet who and whom (and their close kin whoever and whomever) are the only relative pronouns that come in separate subject
and object forms. They’re also the only relative pronouns that refer exclusively to people. In some ways, this aligns them more
closely with the personal pronouns (I/me, she/her, etc.), most of which have distinct subject/object forms.
Is there a connection? Is there a deep-seated human need to sort people, in particular, into subjects and objects? Does some
psychological or sociopolitical force compel us to make this classification, to spell out this hierarchy of power? And is it a
coincidence that the people who insist on preserving whom are the only ones who understand it, in their (in our) position on
the throne of the language kingdom, educated, influential, powerful?
George Orwell, were he around to write for West Coast Editor, would surely say yes. And the rest of us? Well, you may think
it’s laughable. But it’s a rare editor who can fully discount the political dimensions of language.
Whatever the reason for whom’s persistence, it seems that English, at least the formal to semi-formal written variety, is stuck
with it for now. So unless you’re planning a “doom whom” campaign of your own, it’s probably best to accept the pronoun
gracefully, know how to use it correctly, and maybe—just maybe—look ahead to the day when we English users take another
incremental step toward an empowered, classless society by letting one more object go.
March 2008 WEST COAST EDITOR
9
•
Conference workshops (English):
Beyond Words: Editing comic
books and computer games;
Certification: Next Steps;
Cross-Cultural Editing: Plain
language it ain’t; Deal with
Your Stuff: Fresh thinking
about wrangling office clutter;
Editing at the Crossroads; Editing
Corporate Canada; Ethics and
the Professional Editor: How
to make ethical decisions;
Interactive Editing: The
dynamics of editorial projects;
Introduction to Web Content
Management Systems; Revising
Research: Preparing academics
for publication; Senior Editors’
Roundtable on substantive
editing; Swinging Both Ways:
Editors who write; What Flavour
of English Do You Want?;
Writing and Editing in Exile
•
Conference workshops (French):
Outils Internet: le monde s’ouvre
à nous!; Réviseurs indépendants:
secrets de la réussite
professionnelle
•
Closing plenary: “Editing in the
Global Village: Whither—or
Wither?—Canadian Editing”
etcetera
UPCOMING EAC-BC
EVENTS
MONTHLY MEETING PROGRAM:
PUBLIC-PRIVATE BOUNDARIES
IN ONLINE WRITING AND
PUBLISHING
March 19, 2008
In early 2007, EAC-BC webmaster
Derek K. Miller went on medical
leave for cancer treatment. At our
March 19 meeting, Derek will
speak about ways he has found to
continue writing and editing since
going on medical leave. He will
also speak about how he has written
extensively about the process on his
penmachine.com blog.
Derek’s experience demonstrates
how electronic social networks have
changed the way people react to and
share their experiences with disease
and other personal issues, and the
way people delineate their private and
public lives online.
Derek is Communications Manager
for Navarik, a software-as-service
provider for the maritime shipping
industry.
We will draw for a door prize at the
end of the evening. The winner will
receive free admission to one EACBC workshop.
Time: 7:30 pm
Cost: Free for EAC members; $10 for
non-members; $5 for students with
valid ID.
10 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008
Where: YWCA
535 Hornby Street
Welch Room, 4th floor
Vancouver
YWCA is located on the west side
of Hornby Street between Dunsmuir
and Pender, one block northeast of
the Burrard SkyTrain Station. Parking
for the evening is available across the
street for $4.00 after 6:00 pm. Street
parking is also available although it is
metered until 8:00 pm.
Information: www.editors.ca/
branches/bc/meetings.html or
bcprograms@editors.ca
WORKSHOP: CLEAR AND
CONCISE: GUIDELINES FOR
STYLE
April 12, 2008
Instructor: Frances Peck
See the notice on page 12 for more
details.
NATIONAL CONFERENCE:
EDITING IN THE GLOBAL
VILLAGE
Registration Fee: $315 for EAC
members who register on or before
April 30, 2008; $390 for EAC
members who register after April 30,
2008
Where: Shaw Conference Centre
9797 Jasper Avenue
Edmonton
June 6–8, 2008
Information: www.editors.ca/
conference
This year, EAC’s national conference
will be held in Edmonton. Here’s an
overview of what’s on offer:
SPRING 2008 EAC-BC
WORKSHOP
•
Pre-conference workshops:
Instructional Design for Editors;
Web 2.0 for Writers and Editors:
Getting the word out in the social
media networks
May 3, 2008: Essential Research
Skills for Editors
Instructor: Susan Safyan
NEW EAC-BC
MEMBERS
A WARM WELCOME TO ALL
Sylvia Dodd, Vancouver
Amelia Gilliland, Vancouver
Miro Kinch, Vancouver
Erin Klingmann, Victoria
Jenny Lee, West Vancouver
Brigitte Mah, Whistler
Jessica Murdoch, Burnaby
Jill Neumann, Vancouver
Christina Newberry, Vancouver
Alexandra Schmidt, North Vancouver
Nicole Skutelnik, Maple Ridge
Kara Stanley, Halfmoon Bay
Mary Ann Thompson, Port Coquitlam
Linda Twitchell, Bellingham WA
HIGHLIGHTS FROM
PAST EAC EVENTS
FEBRUARY 20, 2008
WORKSHOP: BOOKKEEPING
BASICS
Speaker: Randall Orser
Reviewer: Pamela Findling
“Bookkeepers aren’t boring people,
we just get excited about boring
things,” said Randall Orser. Randall,
an experienced bookkeeper, was
speaking at the February EAC
meeting in Vancouver. He did his
best to make finances and taxes
interesting as he explained the value
of a good bookkeeper.
According to Randall, 80% of
businesses fail within the first 5
years. Of those, most fail due to poor
financial management. This financial
management, he says, is what a
bookkeeper can help with.
Bookkeepers help clients track their
high and low periods, set aside
funds for slower times, prepare
for tax season, and ensure bills are
paid on time. Most importantly,
they relieve clients of the stress and
anxiety associated with their financial
matters.
How do you know if you’ve got a good
bookkeeper? Randall says you should
expect the following from yours:
responsible for more than 16,000 words
losing their hyphens in the latest edition
of the dictionary.
•
•
Compound nouns have been squeezed
together into single words (e.g.
pigeonhole) or split into two (e.g. test
tube).
•
•
•
A willingness to follow through
A basic understanding of your
industry
A strong set of communication
skills
A willingness to make a
commitment to your business
An interest in continuing
education.
If your bookkeeper isn’t meeting
these expectations, it may be time to
re-evaluate whom you trust with your
finances. Otherwise, you might end
up paying more taxes and interest to
the government than you’d planned
to—a costly mistake.
NOW YOU KNOW
CANADA’S OLDEST BOOKSTORE
CLOSES
We’re sad to report that The Book
Room in Halifax—Canada’s oldest
bookstore, which first opened its
doors for business in 1839—will
close. According to CBC, the
bookstore is unable to compete
against big-box stores and online
sales.
The bookstore’s wholesale division
will continue to operate, servicing
those same big-box stores and online
outlets as well as grocery stores and
pharmacies.
Source: “Canada’s oldest bookstore is
closing in Canada,” CBC News, http://
www.cbc.ca/arts/books/story/2008/01/29/bookstore.html?ref=rss, January 2008, accessed
March 3, 2008
HYPHENS AXED
Have you heard? “People are not
confident about using hyphens any
more, they’re not really sure what
they are for.”
So says Angus Stevenson, editor
of the Shorter Oxford English
Dictionary, Sixth Edition and the man
However, while hyphens have been
decimated, they have not been
annihilated. Angus admits that “there are
places where a hyphen is necessary….
Because you can certainly start to get
real ambiguity.”
Source: “Oxford dictionary drops the dash,” Simon
Rabinovitch, The Globe and Mail, September 24, 2007
BLUE PENCILS ARE BAD
Canadian-born editor Brenda Copeland
shared her penchant for green pencils in
a 2003 interview on wordsmitten.com.
In the interview, Brenda says, “It’s the
most wonderful job in the world and
I love it all including the blue pencil
editing. Actually, I use a green pencil—
blue does not photocopy well.”
Source: “Editor Brenda Copeland formerly with
Simon & Schuster: Hyperion Bound,” Wendy
Lestina, http://www.wordsmitten.com/2003atria_
interview.htm, accessed March 3, 2008
CALL FOR
SUBMISSIONS
WEST COAST EDITOR SEEKS
STORIES
Ideas for articles? Contact Cheryl
Hannah at channah@editors.ca.
May 2008: Editing Fiction
Deadline for submissions:
April 16, 2008
September 2008: The Queen’s English
Deadline for submissions:
August 6, 2008
October 2008: The Magazine Issue
Deadline for submissions:
September 10, 2008
March 2008 WEST COAST EDITOR
11
Clear and Concise: Guidelines for Style
April 12, 2008
Clear, concise style is the backbone of strong writing. It’s also the product of lots of cold, hard revision. In this
workshop, editor Frances Peck will discuss various stylistic editing techniques you can use to help ideas emerge
and language sing. You will learn how to create flow, eliminate sloppy shifts and inconsistencies, link ideas
effectively through parallelism and subordination, strengthen sentence structure, and trim wordiness. Through
discussion, examples, and exercises, you’ll examine surefire methods for polishing any type of document.
MS Word 2002 clipart
Date
Saturday, April 12, 2008, 10:00 am to 5:00 pm
Location
SFU Harbour Centre Campus
515 West Hastings Street, Room 1315
Vancouver
Cost
$100 for EAC members who register by Saturday, March 29, 2008
$120 for EAC members who register after Saturday, March 29, 2008
$160 for non-members who register by Saturday, March 29, 2008
$180 for non-members who register after Saturday, March 29, 2008
Information
Contact Christine McPhee or Ricki Ewings at bcworkshops@editors.ca
Registration
Find details about online registration and registration by mail at www.editors.ca/branches/bc/workshops
About the workshop facilitator
Frances Peck is an editor, writer, and instructor with over 20 years’ experience. She prepared the Canadian edition of
The St. Martin’s Workbook, a grammar exercise book, and recently completed Peck’s English Pointers, an e-book for the
Translation Bureau. A member of West Coast Editorial Associates, Frances teaches editing with the Print Futures program
(Douglas College) and the Writing and Publishing program (SFU).
12 WEST COAST EDITOR March 2008