By Megan Petersen-Kindem

I see, in looking over past blog posts, that Charity has covered several different ways to treat dialog, and has outlined their importance.

While I was reading through a piece this week, I was struck by a couple of things. First, the piece was very difficult to follow due to a lack of clarity. Second, and more striking, was a complete lack of dialog. The piece was written in first person, which makes the lack of dialog somewhat more understandable, but there wasn’t even any internal dialog. Perhaps I’m strange, but even when I’m wandering around my house or staring at a computer screen, I’m thinking about what’s next in my day or reviewing some interaction I had earlier in the day.

I don’t know whether a story can be complete without some type of dialog. What do you folks think?

by Mighty Pen intern Megan Petersen-Kindem

Tis a gift to be simple…

Have you ever read something that made no sense, either because the author didn’t know his or her audience or because the language was too flowery? During college, I remember the head of the English department writing, “Be clear!” on several of my papers, usually in red ink and underlined at least three times.

The problem, in most cases, wasn’t that I had used a word in the wrong way, but that a simpler, clearer word would have done just as well.

Now, I’m not suggesting that you “dumb down” your writing, by any means. “Dumbing down” is rarely necessary and almost never advisable. Being concise, consistent, and clear, however, are always both necessary and advisable. This is where it helps to read one’s work aloud, either to a friend or trusted colleague. If something doesn’t make sense, make note of it, and ask for ways to fix it.

Wrong and Wrongful

No, that is not an allusion to any movies from the early 90s. Rather, this is a test on proper grammatical usage. I haven’t seen these two words interchanged very often, but boy, does it cause me to grimace when they are.

Wrong means that something is immoral, unlawful, improper, incorrect, or unsatisfactory.

It’s wrong to take candy from a baby.

Sarah got all of the answers on her homework assignment wrong.

Wrongful  means unjust, unlawful, or having no legal right.

 Jessica was wrongfully accused of stealing the apple. I saw Kim take it when the teacher wasn’t looking.

The cousins made a wrongful demand of the insurance company, since they were uninsured at the time of the accident.

 So… it would be wrong of me to take something that isn’t mine, but wrongful to charge someone three thousand dollars for an item that cost me twenty dollars.

*Note: Thanks to Merriam Webster Online for the definitions.

 by Mighty Pen intern Megan Peterson-Kindem

Wow! I have to include this statistic: print-on-demand new titles released in 2008 (285,394) exceeded, for the first time ever, new traditionally published titles (275,232), according to industry tracker Bowker. We live in interesting times.

From Bowker’s press release:

Based on preliminary figures from U.S. publishers, Bowker is projecting that U.S. title output in 2008 decreased by 3.2%, with 275,232 new titles and editions, down from the 284,370 that were published in 2007.

Despite this decline in traditional book publishing, there was another extraordinary year of growth in the reported number of “On Demand” and short-run books produced in 2008. Bowker projects that 285,394 On Demand books were produced last year, a staggering 132% increase over last year’s final total of 123,276 titles. This is the second consecutive year of triple-digit growth in the On Demand segment, which in 2008 was 462% above levels seen as recently as 2006.

Read the full article here.

Yes. Yes, more about speech tags. Loyal readers of this blog know that speech tags are a frequent source of discussion here.

You’ve no doubt seen speech tags written two ways:

 ”Grab your umbrella, sweetheart,” mom said.

“Grab your umbrella, sweetheart,” said mom.

Both “said mom” and “mom said” are perfectly correct, but “said mom” is considered by some to be old fashioned. Contemporary usage suggests using the “mom said” format, putting the speaker’s name first and the verb second.

I don’t strongly about this one; I do not think it’s a “make or break” issue.

When using adjective strings that include numbers, there’s no need to add s. For example:

A five-year-old girl. (Not A five-years-old girl.)

Two-foot-high grass. (Not two-feet-high grass.)

However, if the description precedes the noun it describes and is therefore not hyphenated, do add s. For example:

The girl is five years old. (Not The girl is five-years-old.)

My grass is two feet high. (Not My grass is two-feet-high.)

…and on an unrelated subject, happy Mother’s Day to all you hard-working moms looking up editing tips!

Last week, I wrote about the dangers of possessives and how I often see them misused, particularly on business signs and other such places.

Today, I’m tackling another animal.

“Look, their eating and I see a bear right they’re that’s going to steal there food!”

Wait a minute…

Those words all look similar, and they sound the same, but I’m pretty sure something is wrong with that sentence.

There is used to indicate place, as in “Look up there! A plane is coming right towards us!”

They’re is a contraction used to replace “They are.” As in, “They’re going to see a play tonight. Would you like to go with them?”

Their often indicates possession or the objects of an action. “Their coats are hanging in the hall closet.” “Their capture led to an immediate loss of the game.”

Huh. Well, I think I know what’s wrong with that sentence now. Let’s try again…

“Look, they’re eating and I see a bear right there that’s going to steal their food!”

Reading a sentence aloud won’t fix this problem, because all three words sound the same. In order to ensure proper usage, it’s probably best to trust either your favorite editor or your favorite dictionary. You’ll save yourself a lot of time and you’ll save your readers from a world of confusion.

by Megan Peterson-Kindem

There’s an interesting device that writers sometimes sneak in to their writing; we in the editing world call it the As-You-Know-Bob technique.

“As you know, Bob, we’ve been married for six years . . .”

“As you know, Bob, our company is declaring bankruptcy . . .”

“As you know, Bob, a bear is chasing us . . .”

Do you see it? It’s a not-so-subtle attempt to give readers background information without resorting to a lengthy explanation.

The motivation to do this is admirable: there’s no better way to stop a reader from reading than starting one’s story with a long block of back story (also known as an info dump. Lorem Ipsum also has a very funny discussion of the infamous info dump beginning with “As you know, self,. . .”).

Dialog is a much more interesting way of conveying information, and the impact of dialog is great and two-fold.

The idea behind the As-You-Know-Bob technique, abbreviated AYKB, is noble. The pitfall, however, is obvious: Of course Bob knows! He knows he’s been married for six years, he knows his company’s declared bankruptcy, and there’s no doubt he knows a bear is chasing him! (Evil Editor has a nice series on the subject.)

Rather than As-You-Know-Bob-ing, consider providing the reader with the necessary information with more subtlety, and offering more luscious detail in the process:

“Bob, on our wedding day, did you ever imagine that we’d have be secret agents wanted by the FBI six short years later?”

“When the lawyers called you yesterday, Bob, did the bankruptcy trustee tell you not to shred your phone records?”

“Faster, Bob, faster!” Jason cried as Bob struggled in a blackberry bush, the bear close behind.

The AYKB technique has an illustrious history, especially among science fiction and fantasy writers. Shelley’s Frankenstein and Huxley’s Brave New World are rift with AYKBs, and Robert A. Heinlein and Isaac Asimov are guilty, too. So if you find yourself sharing information with characters who already know it, you’re in good company.

(For more tips about writing dialog, check our archives: Dialog, Dialog II: Return of Dialog, and Dialog III: Son of Dialog.)

“Two-for-one sandwiches on Wednesday’s from noon until two!” a sign proclaims to me.

Huh. Well, that’s very nice, but who is Wednesday and what does Wednesday have that I don’t? Nowhere on the sign am I told what it is that belongs to Wednesday. Why? My guess is that the writer didn’t know how to use possessives properly.

“Two-for-one sandwiches on Wednesdays from noon until two!”

Wonderful. I can eat more and pay less – it’s the American dream!

Now, what if I had a friend named Wednesday? Too unlikely? Okay. Let’s say I am a friend of Detective Friday, and he’s about to retire. I want to invite the office to a celebration of his career. Well, that’s when I can use the apostrophe.

Please join me for Detective Friday’s retirement party on Friday at Friday’s desk. Cake, punch, and pretzels will be served starting at three.

To avoid confusion, I would probably edit that notice even further, and say that the snacks will be served at Detective Friday’s desk, but grammatically speaking, the notice is sound.

So, how can writers avoid confusion? First, read the sentence aloud. Then, read the sentence aloud without the contractions. Does it still make sense? If not, then it may be time to consult your favorite dictionary – or your favorite editor. Either will be happy to help. There’s also a quiz here to test your knowledge of plurals and possessives. Have fun!

By Megan Peterson-Kindem

By Mighty Pen intern Megan Petersen-Kindem

Last Wednesday, I traveled to Salem with Pen editor Nancy D’Inzillo for a book launch. Along the way, the five of us in the car were discussing regional differences in speech and dialog.  When we were discussing the use of “y’all” in the South, it at first seemed to make a lot of sense. After all, there isn’t much in English that can be used to address everyone, the way that ustedes is used in Spanish. 

However, our traveling companion pointed out a problem. “You do know,” she said, “That ‘y’all’ is singular, and ‘all y’all’ is plural.”

Nancy was appalled. “That construction makes no sense.”

Well, perhaps it doesn’t here in Portland, but it clearly does in certain states of the Union.

In the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, you “shut out” the television or the lights rather than turning them off. 

So what’s the lesson here? For an editor, it’s to watch for colloquialisms and regional differences in speech that might be translated to the page. For writers, on the other hand, I think it’s another reminder to take the time to research. If you’re writing a story set in the South or in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, you should probably contact a native of those areas to get a good idea of how they actually speak. After all, if you’re choosing to skip speech tags (link to previous article goes here), colloquialisms will definitely differentiate your characters. Just don’t let them leak into the narrative without good reason.