Who Just Said That!?

Many students enter the collegiate realm with little experience in writing college-level papers. Frankly, most undergraduate papers give their teachers headaches and drinking problems. "Almost 85% of all college professors think their students must learn better writing skills before entering their respective fields." Whoa! Who said that? Where are you?

"I can see you."

WTF?! Get away from me!? Who are you!? "I'm the Quote Phantom! I surprise professors and tutors, and I excel at confusing readers and murdering paragraphs!"

I'll get you yet, Quote Phantom!

*sounds of a struggle*

Hi, my name is Bradley Woodrum. You may remember me from such hits as "Learning to Love the OWL" and my ex-poh-zei on econocats, "Dreams with Cats with Jobs." I have killed many grammar beasts in the past, but the Quote Phantom never seems to die. Maybe it is because teachers ask us to fill quote quotas, or maybe it's because the phantom is technically already dead, but almost every paper that reaches the Writing Center has a quote without explanation.

Instead of just warning the reader, "Hey! This next quote is from Shakespeare," we slap a copy of the line into the paper, squeeze some punctuation around it, and then high-five ourselves for not plagarizing. BUT IT'S WRONG!

"Don't begin paragraphs with quotes, unless you are willing to explain them within that same sentence," Bradley said, loading comma bullets into his shotgun. Bradley also believed that long quotes deserve full sentences before them:

By leading into a long quote with a full sentence, we prep the reader for the coming content. Essentially, we should just summarize the quote.

Some may ask, "Why quote at all then?" Excellent question! Only quote when the author has said something so perfectly, or so authoritatively, that it loses is power if said any other way.

If we are not sure whether our quote is long or not, then we must treat it with caution and use a lead-in sentence anyway. Bradley believes a paper can never have too many colons: "If you are using colons (the two dot things ':'), it means you are explaining stuff. Which is good."

Just: BEWARE THE QUOTE PHANTOM!

Source.

Bradley Woodrum also writes for Homebody and Woman and Cubs Stats and enjoys watching Ghost Hunters more than he probably should.

Read It Out Loud

Flossing is one of those tasks we all need to do, but most of us fail to do. It is an irrational decision on our part because the benefits (a mouth full of healthy teeth) far outweigh the costs (a little bit of time and maybe some bloody gums). The two main reasons I fail to floss come down to these:

1. I'm convinced I brushed well enough to clean my teeth sufficiently.

2. I'm lazy.

Consider what the late Mitch Hedberg said:

People who smoke cigarettes, they say "You don't know how hard it is to quit smoking." Yes I do. It's as hard as it is it to start flossiling.

Most likely, the majority of people who read the preceding quote will not notice the typos I have inserted. Sure, it's probably easier to noticed that mispelling of the last word, but the extra it? Not likely.

Proofreading is much like flossing (not at all like flossiling, though). It is something we must do, but irrationally decide not to do.

The only way to proofread, and proofread well, is to simply get in a habit of doing it! I have reached a point now where I feel compelled to proofread my text messages, my emails, and my bathroom stall graffiti. Once I started re-reading the small stuff, re-reading the big stuff became easy, if not compulsory!

If we ever want to have our written words demand respect (or, likewise, demand good grades), we MUST proofread. And if we're going to proofread we should do so OUT LOUD!

The above Hedberg quote, even on a second read, proves a tricky proofreading task. If we read it in our head only, we are likely to entirely miss the extra it, though we may notice the misspelling; yet few readers would not notice the extra it when reading aloud!

Unfortunately, reading out loud takes a little bit longer than reading in our head. However, I promise it’s generally worth it because reading aloud is equal to reading internally twice yet takes less time. Therefore:

Proofread! Proofread out loud!

You will be surprised at the changes you need to make.

Bradley Woodrum also writes for Homebody and Woman and Cubs Stats and enjoys wistfully looking at pictures of free cats on Craigslist.

The Delicate Balance

In my last groundbreaking article on writing habits, I encounraged writers -- specifically those who struggle writing discernable sentences -- to explain things to our new friend Bunce the bunny.

HOWEVER: This prescription is not always the right one! Some writers fall to the other end of the spectrum, the dreaded...

Write-Like-a-Text-Message Side!

ZOMG! srsly! ur graed may b on teh line!1!!!1!!eleventy!!!

As much as I love lolspeak, I’m sad to say that neither the academic nor business community have accepted that beautiful dialect. Therefore, we must persevere in our own, proper tongue: English!

The Write-Like-a-Text-Message Side of our writing spectrum rarely appears as dramatically as lolspeak, but I have seen definitive incarnations of near-text message style writing in my years as a tutor. Here are some handy rules for those who may write too casually:

No Contractions
This is a pretty sound and universal rule. The only places for contractions (e.g. I’m, wanna, can’t, and won’t) include: dialogue, informal emails, blog posts, and ransom notes. In other words, no contractions in essays, no contractions in reports, no contractions in applications, and no contractions in anything important.*

Controlled Abbreviations
We must resist the urge to write OK instead of okay. We must -- AT ALL COSTS -- avoid writing lol, omg, and even wrt (which means with respect to). Acceptable abbreviations include: titles (e.g. Mr. or Dr.), organizations (e.g. IMF, PETA, or EU), or other well-known acronyms or abbreviations (e.g. USA or i.e. or e.g.). Some writers -- me included – subscribe to the school of thought that a proper paper should not contain Latin abbreviations (which includes e.g. and i.e.).**

Controlled Interjections
Sometimes when I write a paper, you know, I end up putting all these, like, interjections in it, and they only make it kind of like harder to read. The paper sounds HIGHLY conversational and makes the reader/teacher/grader/boss convinced that there is no base of effort or knowledge behind the writing. We must judiciously employ interjections and completely avoid: you know, kind of, sort of, and unnecessary use of like.

No You
There are few grammatical conventions that I hate more the than the second person, the awful you. As a reader, it makes me defensive and confused: At first, I assume the speaker or writer is accusing me of being a certain way (I’ve read papers that started “You never know what to expect when…” and come away thinking -- like I hell I didn’t know what to expect! I knew exactly how this or that was going to be!). The second reaction is likely confusion because -- at some point -- I may notice that I’m not the target audience (Such as papers that have told me “…the best way to take care of your kids.” Well, I’m sorry paper, but unless you count three video game consoles and two computers offspring, then I am childless.)

Writing can be much like driving: If we drive to slow, or write too lackadaisically, we risk trouble just as much as if we drive too fast, or write too “scientifically.” Instead, we must strike a balance between these twin dangers and achieve the delicate balance.

Here's a pitcherr of a cat that the Writing Center shood bai:

Source.

*It should be understood that I am not attempting to imply that I do not care about this blog post. I care deeply for anything my favorite writer, me, writes.

**Readers would be wise to note that this blog post is not a proper piece of writing.

Bradley Woodrum also writes for Homebody and Woman and Cubs Stats and enjoys inventing words like "muscley."

Perfect Punctuation: Our Comrade the Comma

Perk up, Persian Cat, commas aren't so cruel!

Our readers will recall how I revealed, last December, the mysterious and troubling powers of the dash. Now, we shall continue this Perfect Punctuation series with many writers' greatest hurdle: the comma!

Countless people feel as though comma rules are endless and uncertain, arcane and imperfect. To these writers, I implore greater punctuation patience. Instead of surrendering to comma catastrophes, let's just learn a little at time. Today, we're going to start with three easy comma rules from OWL:

Use commas to separate independent clauses when they are joined by any of these seven coordinating conjunctions: and, but, for, or, nor, so, yet.

Many grammar-nerds such as myself refer to these coordinating conjunctions as the FANBOYS: for, and, nor, but, or, yet, and so! The beauty of coordinating conjunctions is that, when paired with a comma, they are as powerful as a period! So, I could say:

I love cats. They really don't care about me.

...Or...

I love cats, yet they really don't care about me.

However, if the subject is the same on both sides (i.e. you don't have two independent sentences) then a comma is unnecessary:

I love cats fur. I really like how they generally disdain human interaction.

...If we combine them...

I love cats fur and really like how they generally disdain human interaction.

You see? No comma needed. That comma + FANBOYS tells the reader to expect a new subject (i.e. a new sentence). The exception to this rule is if the subsequent sentence is sufficiently short, like: "I like my wife and she likes me."

As the sentences grow in complexity and length, the necessity of that clarifying comma increases.

Follow the jump and watch your knowledge grow!