Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Creation >

How Can I Learn to Write Proper?

wembley can change in 28 days

08:02 / 06.04.05

I've been reading lots of David Foster Wallace ('lithers who missed or would like to re-read his 2001 essay in Harper's Magazine, here is Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars over Usage), and a lot of Haus' posts, and generally quite a lot of text lately. The other day, someone on McSweeney's posted a list of Unspoken Afterthoughts to Childhood Catch Phrases and used the word "infantilizing." A bomb went off in my head. Infantilizing is not a word. Somewhere, in the glorious legacy left us by Latin, Greek, germanics and a slew of other tongues, there is a word for infantilizing. And I have no idea what it is, but if I knew it, I should prefer to use that word rather than make one up.

There is so much linguistic "creativity" these days - I'm as guilty as the next one here - but a lot of it is sheer laziness. We don't know the real word so we make one up, mutilating words that we already know. How far away is this from doubleplusungood?

Ranting aside, I know that not everyone is going to agree with me when I say that if you want to play with language, stretch it about, and especially get paid to do so, you should know how your language works, but I feel very strongly about this. When DFW makes up a word, he at least knows what his alternatives are.

How do you do it? What did you read? What are the sources you trust for usage? How'd you expand your vocabulary? I know if I sit down with enough Joyce I'll have learned something, and that The Deluxe Transitive Vampire is very well done and informative. I've learned what a dependent clause is about five times, and I always forget when someone asks me. How do you keep up?

14:35 / 06.04.05

There is definitely an argument, and to my mind a fairly persuasive one, that by its very nature language is constantly evolving and changing. What else is language, and within that vocabulary, for if not communication?

If using 'infantilizing' is the easiest way for me to make myself understood, and for others to understand what I'm trying to get across, then surely I should use it.

There may be alternatives that mean the same thing, but if I can communicate using 'infantilizing' then is there really any benefit in me knowing or using them? And would other people understand me as easily them if I did use them?

I would argue that there is no 'real' word for anything, just that which the majority ascribe to it, and this is subject to change at any time. To an extent, making words up is how language has always worked, and to attempt to freeze it at a certain point and say 'this is right' is fairly pointless.

14:53 / 06.04.05

is so a word!

stupidhead.

18:26 / 06.04.05

omg! LOL!

wembley can change in 28 days

07:08 / 07.04.05

My bad, I accidentally looked it up in the thesaurus.

So we've established that I'm even stupider than I thought, and that I'm probably evil for suggesting that I want to learn grammar.

But is anyone actually going to help me instead of giving me the arguments I've already heard? Thanks, skellybones, but I don't mean this thread to be a place to argue the point. I want good references, please and thanks!

08:20 / 07.04.05

One way to improve your vocabulary would be to do The Times crossword every day. If you're new to cryptic crosswords then working through the day before's solution would be a good way to start. The Chambers dictionary is the de facto standard for crossword setters and solvers, so you should probably invest in a copy.

For grammar, I don't know. I learnt my English grammar at my mother's knee over a number of years. I do have a small book called English Grammar, published by Collins I think. Reading it is quite amusing. I have the distinct impression that the rules of grammar were made up a long time after the fact.

.....

Language is for communicating? What a quaint notion. Language is for thinking and the establishment of group consciousness.

It was only Humpty Dumpty who really thought "Words mean what I want them to mean"

08:30 / 07.04.05

Sorry, went off on one there.
Looking at our, admittedly rather threadbare, reference library here, I'd suggest
Usage and Abusage as a good place to start if you want to pick up on common errors. It covers plenty of grammatical bugbears and examples of incorrect usage. It's fairly amusing and surprisingly readable for a grammar primer.

Personally, I'd say you can't go far wrong with Fowler's, which is probably the best-known reference work for modern English usage, and a staple for eds, subs, writers, journos, basically anyone who anything to do with the written word.

wembley can change in 28 days

09:00 / 07.04.05

Thanks to you both for the suggestions - crosswords, my god. I only do crosswords nowadays when I'm in an airplane, because then I can at least pick up the International Herald Tribune. In Helsinki the english-language crosswords are thin on the ground - and I hate the notion of paying for a paper (usually a day or two old) just for the crossword... but maybe if I get to my local library early enough I can try the new york times, or the guardian or what not. Doing crosswords online seems irritating, as does printing them out and doing them - I seem to need them in the context of a newspaper, but maybe I'll just have to get over that.

At work we're slaves of the Chicago Manual, which I have learned to revere. American usage (I'm Canadian, so we have our own bloody set of rules which borrows from both the UK and US and then mixes it up with some bacon) isn't all that bad once you get used to it. Keep 'em coming, though!

And if you could choose one dictionary to buy (price no object), what would you buy?

09:17 / 07.04.05

The New Oxford Dictionary of English is excellent, if a little unwieldy (it's roughly A4 size and weighs a ton). It's about £30, and probably as comprehensive as you're ever going to need.
Seriously though, it's stupidly heavy.

18:39 / 07.04.05

Ah, I didn't realise you were looking for something like the Chicago Manual of Style. In that case I suggest Hart's Rules for Compositors and Readers, if it's still in print. <smug>I have a beautiful 1978 thirty-eighth edition.</smug>

at the scarwash

21:16 / 07.04.05

Strunk and White's Elements of Style is a nice, tidy, pocket-sized grammar reference. Otherwise. Read. Read. Read. Copy down phrases and phrasings that strike you. There is no real need to know what the hell a dangling participle is, just how to avoid/use one. With writers you admire, try to get under the hood of a paragraph. What makes that sentence striking? Note tone, aliteration and consonance, figures of speech, etc. Just thinking about it, really obsessing over it will help you.

For the vocab, read authors who have a tendency towards incomprehensible words. And look them up. David Foster Wallace is a good place to start on that front.

06:39 / 08.04.05

others include wyndham lewis; thomas pynchon; even ol' mervyn peake.

and making up your own words or spelling is worth the effut...