"Should of" is not a thing

This is much like the he’s/his issue, where people are inclined to write what they hear without actually thinking about the meaning of the words being used.

“Should of” does not mean anything. Neither does “could of”, “must of”, “would of”, etc.
The reason you’re saying it or writing it like this is probably because they are contractions – “should’ve” (should have) and “could’ve” (could have) – which makes it sound like they have “of” in there somewhere.

“I should have/should’ve gone to the party” is correct. “I should of gone to the party” makes no sense.

This is why making assumptions is a bad idea. Lazy writing and lazy speaking can leave some negative impressions on all the right people. So, know what you’re saying before you say it. If you’re ever in doubt, it takes just a few seconds to check!

If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!

www.thewritething.com.au

Prepositions: What are they and why should I care?

Here is another interesting suggestion from one of my friends.
Prepositions. We all know the word, but do we know the meaning and significance of it?
As school becomes a thing of the past, it can be easy to forget what each grammatical term refers to, so let’s start with this one.

What are they?

The Macquarie dictionary describes a preposition as “a word which defines the relationship between a noun (or pronoun) and some other word(s) in the sentence.”
This means the preposition is usually telling you when, how, where, etc. Without prepositions, we wouldn’t get to add detail as easily.

Examples:
The dog sat on my bed.
She walked across the road.
We ate lunch inside the café.

If you want a little clue to help you remember what prepositions are, think of the “positions” part of the word. Often a preposition will tell you what position the subject of the sentence is in.

Why should I care?

Well, there’s a good chance you use prepositions every time you speak and write. They are an essential part of our language, and I personally think it’s important to know as much as you can about the everyday things you do. A preposition can assist you in descriptions and in connecting words to one another. This is extremely useful in communication, both in social and professional contexts. And the more of them you know, the more versatile you can be in your word usage. Good language is impressive to many people, myself included.

Another reason to care became apparent to me through one of my friends, who is a speech pathologist.
She reminded me that many of her patients (who are kids) struggle to use prepositions. This sort of blog post, though brief, might be useful for those patients. Being able to communicate easily is something we probably all take for granted, but unfortunately it is a challenge for some. When there is a barrier preventing you from communicating properly, it must be a very frustrating and disheartening experience. So, if you have the ability to use prepositions, know what they are and use them well. Spread the knowledge. It might help someone.


If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!www.thewritething.com.au

His and he’s are two different words

I recently asked my Facebook followers to share their pet peeves and grammar queries with me. I am so glad this one came up. Thanks, Gwen!

Too often people will use a wrong word simply because it sounds close enough to the right one. This is a very lazy thing to do, and it’s not the kind of mistake you want to be making, if any.

Examples of said lazy mistake:

He took he’s hat off.
His going to the movies with me.
I am going to he’s house to watch he’s movies because his really nice.

None of those sentences make sense, but they happen. A little too often.
With most things, you just need to take a second to consider what you’re writing or saying before you actually deliver it. Ask yourself: What even is “he’s”?
Well, it’s a contraction. “He” and “is” have been put together, and it can also be "he" and "has". Once you realise that, you probably won’t be using it for ownership anymore. You should only use “he’s” when you want to say “he is” or "he has". And then hopefully you’ll be using “his” for ownership, as it should be.

Examples of how to use these two words correctly:

His results were outstanding.
He’s going shopping for his mum.
He's fixed the car.
He’s so smart that his teachers let him skip a grade.

This topic almost ties in with the your/you’re/their/they’re/there issue, which I have dealt with in one of my earlier posts. If you wish to read it, go here.

Remember, just because it sounds right, doesn’t necessarily mean it is right. Buying your mum flours might sound good in conversation, but the second you write it down there will be confusion.




If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!
www.thewritething.com.au

Climatic or climactic?

Yes, there are two different words with two different meanings. It is confusing because they sound very much the same, so one can be forgiven for using them in the wrong context. But that’s why it’s important to investigate and learn new things, perhaps by reading blog posts like these.

To highlight this lesson I’m going to use Lord of the Rings. No one is really surprised.

In The Return of the King when the Ring (yes, this ring gets a capital because Tolkien said so) finally gets destroyed in the fires of Mount Doom, it’s emotional, exciting, and dramatic. But it’s also a climax of the film, so we can also describe it as climactic. It’s a good word to use when there is a climax.
Another climactic moment occurs in The Two Towers when Aragorn and Theoden lead their army out of the gates at sunrise, and Gandalf and Eomer arrive shortly after to help them win the battle for Helm’s Deep. And it’s also probably my favourite scene ever, but that’s beside the point.

The other word is climatic. Notice the difference?
Climatic has one less “c” in it, and it refers to the climate. You might use it like this:
“Climatic factors occasionally hinder the characters on their journey through Middle Earth.”
Or, the non-geek version:
“Predictable climatic conditions make it easier to plan holidays.”

So, how will you remember which is which?

The way I see it, climatic is pretty easy. It sounds a lot like the word it belongs to: climate.
Just take climate and replace the e with ic.

And I remember climactic belongs to climax because of the extra c. I like to look at the extra c as representing the x in climax. The x is a reminder that there is something extra involved in this word, so chuck in an extra c.
I hope that helps!

If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!

www.thewritething.com.au

Lost in translation

In reference to my business I often talk about the value of meaningful communication, as that is one of the reasons I am passionate about perfecting written communication through editing. The way we communicate matters if you want to deliver your message well. Bad word usage, sentence structure, or even a typo can have a negative impact on your message. This article provides a fun yet concerning list of written errors that led to significant repercussions.
Whether you’re a large company hoping to achieve something significant, or a small business looking to attract the attention of a potential passing customer, you need to avoid mistakes. Typos and poor grammar can turn people off.

But one important thing to consider, which became more apparent to me in the last month, is that often mistakes are a result of problems in translation. This occurs not only in writing, but in speaking as well. I spent some time in France and Belgium recently, and had lots of fun observing the way things translate differently from French to English, and vice versa. I was already aware of this, as I studied French in high school, but seeing it and hearing it around me was an eye-opening experience.

For example, on a tour to the magnificent Mont Saint Michel in Normandy, our tour guide would sometimes say the name in what would technically be the English translation: Mount Saint Michael. And every time he said it, I smiled. It sounded kind of funny, and I think that’s because some things just don’t need to be translated – especially names.

I think part of communicating effectively involves acknowledging and understanding, to some extent, the different languages of the world. And it’s important to use some logic as well, because quite often direct translations don’t make sense.
For example, a chocolate croissant in French is pain au chocolat, for which the direct translation would be chocolate bread. But you probably wouldn’t put “chocolate bread” on a menu. You need to consider what chocolate bread might be referring to, and adjust it in a way that English speakers will understand.
Another good example is chocolat chaud, which is a hot chocolate. But if you tried to translate that as two separate words in that order without considering the way French works, it would come out as "chocolate hot".
It does seem that French words are a little back-to-front at times, like in “la tour Eiffel”, where the tower part comes first. But they usually translate well. You just have to be aware of the differences if you’re dealing with other languages. And don't assume that "tour" in French just means "tour" in English. Always find out first.

If, in your writing, you wish to use a language other than the one(s) you’re familiar with, just be sure you’re learning as much as you can about it. A mix-up in translation can be just as damaging as a typo. In general it matters to be thorough and strive to communicate in the way that your audience will understand.

On a side note, consider one of my favourite quotes by JRR Tolkien:
“Do not write down to children or to anybody.”
I agree that we should be as complex as we can be because surely that will encourage others to learn something new. Use other languages if you can. Use big words. Be clever and diverse. But my message is to be sure you’re doing it right. Translate properly, get your stuff edited, and just double-check things.

And a little bit of travel advice:
If you’re in a foreign country and struggle to understand the language, always consider context. If your taxi driver has stopped and is talking in his/her language and gesturing to the left and the right, and you’re too focused on trying to understand what they're saying, you might miss the very obvious fact that they’re asking whether to go left or right. It’s not always about words; sometimes body language and surroundings can give away what the person is trying to communicate. Just think about where you are and what you’re doing, and the meaning behind what is written or being spoken may become clearer.

If you see a red windmill in front of the words "Moulin Rouge" it might be fair to assume moulin rouge means "red windmill". Again, though, it's backwards, so if you took it word by word without considering French properly you would get "mill red". This is also another example of a time you would just leave the French name as it is, because Moulin Rouge sounds much nicer than Mill Red, or even Red Mill.




If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!

www.thewritething.com.au

How to answer a question properly (and why that’s important)

Answering questions properly and presenting solid arguments can be a challenge, so I’ve been analysing what works best and why it matters. This could be relevant to you no matter who you are or what you do, but perhaps more so if you are: a student, a public speaker, a politician, a job seeker, or a writer. Or maybe you believe in the value of a well-structured argument/debate.

Recently I got my hands on a copy of the latest Marie Claire (July 2016 edition), which is kind of weird for me. I don’t look at magazines unless I see something of value to read. Well my eyes caught something on the front cover that I wanted to check out: a Turnbull/Shorten interview (page 50, if you’re interested).
I’d rather not use politics as an example for writing advice, but this one was too good to pass up.

Reading through it I noticed the best answers – the ones I paid attention to and believed – were the ones that got straight to the point, provided lists or statistics, and didn’t use vague statements to avoid a clear answer. The influence those answers had on my interpretation – whether positive or negative – was fascinating.
Let’s look at an example.

Both men were asked, “What are the most important issues for women in 2016?”
(I will list and analyse the responses without specifying who said what, because if I do it will become a political blog post, which is not really what I’m going for…)

1) “Respect is absolutely critical, whether you’re talking about access to great jobs and business opportunities or domestic violence. The most important thing we can do is teach our sons to respect women. Respect for women is part of my DNA, which informs every aspect of our policies. Women hold up half of the sky, as the Chinese say, and they should be given due credit for it in every respect.”

2) “If this country does nothing else in the next 10 years, we must achieve the equal treatment of women. Everything from more women in positions of power or in parliament, to bridging the pay gap, gender savings gap and the burden of unpaid care that falls on women, right through to the worst example of the unfair treatment of women in society: domestic violence. If we can do nothing else but solve those problems, we will be a very rich country. We need to put more women into more positions of power.”

Notice some differences?

The first response was centred on the overall importance of respect for women, which he repeated a couple of times. He also referenced a Chinese saying to support his opinion, which gives the impression he’s filling in space instead of elaborating on his points. It was nice, and he mentioned a couple of issues, but he didn’t focus on them enough. It wasn’t convincing or satisfying.

The second response, however, was very clear in its answers. He acknowledged equal treatment of women as the most important goal for Australians to achieve, and then he listed the exact issues that need to be addressed to achieve that. He told us what and how without tiptoeing around it. The first response did offer up a little bit of what and a little bit of how, but the second response was far more effective at doing that.
The question is: Why?

This sort of pattern seems to emerge a lot in politics, but also in other familiar places, like in essays and job interviews.
I remember during my studies sometimes I didn’t understand an essay question or I couldn’t figure out how to answer one, so I would just try to write as much as I could about the topic. I thought that would be enough and it sounded great because I could write really well, but my content lacked any real meaning because I was avoiding the point of the essay. As a result, I failed to answer the question and subsequently received lower marks.

I wish I had done then what I’m about to suggest to you all now.

To answer a question properly you need to first reread the question and realise what it is asking of you. A question about the causes of climate change, for example, is not the time to get carried away about your opinion, or even what the results of climate change are – unless, of course, you are asked to do so. If the question asks about causes, you must list causes. What are the causes? Why are they causes? How impactful is each cause?
If someone asked me a question like that, I’d probably go off on a tangent and talk about the results, and what it means for the future of Earth, and so on. I might provide good information and I might have more fun, but in many cases my arguments could fall flat, because we need to focus on what we’re specifically asked in order to satisfy our audience.

Now, of course, this applies more strictly to school and university. Essays usually require you to answer the questions very specifically. It really depends on what you’re being asked to do. But if you lose track, you risk not answering the question at all. In the essay context, you’ll get lower marks. In the interview context, your answers won’t be valued or taken seriously. It matters.

So, if you don’t understand the question, spend some time making sure you do. If you’re unclear on the meaning of a word, look it up. If the wording confuses you, get someone else to read it to you or provide their take on it. You can also ask whoever is asking the question to clarify what they mean.
And, if it helps, re-write the question for your own sake, in a way that makes the most sense to you.

Once you’re clear on what the question requires of you, you need to think of the best way to present your answer. Structure matters. Let’s look at how our politicians utilised structure.

2) He identified the problem: gender inequality.
He listed the exact issues, as requested by the question: more women in parliament/power, bridging the pay gap and gender savings gap, the burden of unpaid care, and domestic violence.
He recognised the impact of these issues, that our country will be rich even if gender inequality is the only thing we solve.
He concluded with a suggestion on how to begin the process, by putting women in positions of power.

Evidently the structure of this response is clean and carefully considered. It has a beginning, middle, and end. I’m actually a little impressed he managed that in an interview context. Now look at the first response, and notice how the structure isn’t as easy to follow, which makes it harder to absorb.

1) He didn’t identify the problem, but rather jumped straight to an answer, which was to respect women.
He mentioned a few issues, which addressed the question briefly: career and business opportunities, and domestic violence.
He reiterated his view on respect.
He made it personal by referencing his own DNA.
He used a Chinese saying to support his beliefs.

After reading through both responses many times, I have determined that one good way to introduce your response is by looking at why the question is being asked in the first place. If it’s about the causes of climate change, I would probably open with an acknowledgement of climate change as a real and important issue, and then lead into how it has become such an issue by listing the causes.

In the case of our politicians, the second response approached it well because he had things he wanted to acknowledge, but he prefaced them with an important statement before simply listing them. He took the time to first address the fact that the question was being asked, by pointing out how important it is to eradicate gender inequality in the first place. Then he was able to list the various examples of gender inequality to solidify his stance.
The problem with the first response was that he seemingly heard “women’s issues” and jumped straight to “respect women” instead of framing something a little more substantial. That isn’t to say respect is a bad thing to bring up. It just doesn’t get your attention like the second answer does. And in essays and interviews and speeches and arguments, you want to get your audience’s attention with something more specific.

As you can see, structuring your response in the right way can give you a head-start. But the content matters just as much. Response 2 offered a good number of examples of gender equality issues, and they were all solid. Response 1 offered only a few, and they were not necessarily good choices. Domestic violence was a good one to bring up, of course, but the other two were not as well thought out. It’s almost one point spread across two. This could leave readers thinking perhaps our interviewee is a little ignorant or indifferent on the topic. Having the right information is the first step, and knowing which to focus on is what can put you ahead. It shows that you understand what you’re talking about.

However, to be fair, both responses offered their opinion on what to do about it. 1 said we need to respect women and teach our men to respect women. 2 said we need to give women more power. Both are good points, but there’s a subtle difference that helps the second one over the line.
Respect is a very broad and general term. It’s easy to throw that word around and know it means good things. But suggesting women belong in positions of power requires a little more preparation. You have to first know that there aren’t enough women in power, and then know that women being in power will be useful to inequality and the country as a whole, and then understand its importance in solving the overall problem. This alone makes the second response even stronger.

And all of this is important because you need your readers/audience to understand you and believe you. If you have an important message to get across, it won’t happen with poor content and structure. If you have to write an essay, you’ll give yourself the best chance at high marks if you put thought into your response. It matters even if you’re not answering a question. You need to be able to provide people with the information they need or want to hear. If you don’t, they may lose interest or miss the point, and it really sucks when you’re not heard or understood.

If you have something important to say, or you need to hit the nail on the head in an interview, it’s a good idea to consider some of this stuff. So, I’ll summarise:

Do:
- understand your question – clarify its meaning, and re-write if you need to
- consider the structure – acknowledge the topic/question/problem, list the reasons/examples, show its importance, and provide a possible solution
- be straight to the point
- use good content – lists, statistics, numbers, facts
- know what is relevant – the content that will answer the question and appeal to your audience the most

Don’t:
- use vague statements and ideas that could be applied to anything
- tiptoe around and avoid the actual question
- forget the question
- go off on tangents and get distracted
- go in blind without being sure you understand the question or topic

Why?
- to engage your audience/interviewer and hold their attention
- to help people understand and believe your message without confusion
- to have your views valued and taken seriously (in interviews, for example)
- to demonstrate your knowledge and competence to get higher marks (in essays, for example)
- to spread important information in the most effective way
- to satisfy your audience by actually answering the question


And here’s why it matters to everyone else if you’re not answering questions well:
If you struggle to make your point, it comes across as though you don’t know enough, you don’t care enough, and/or you’re lying. And those are not good things if you’re in a position to answer/argue/explain.
But, of course, sometimes it’s just social anxiety, which is totally understandable.

I hope this proves useful to some of you!

If you're looking for editing or proofreading services, be sure to visit my website to check out the services and rates I offer. Thank you for reading!

www.thewritething.com.au

The question mark

When editing, I see people misuse question marks quite often.

You should only use a question mark at the end of a question.

The problem is, many think it belongs at the end of a sentence like this: I wonder how many people attended the concert?

That is not a question, and so the question mark should not be there.
You’re stating that you’re wondering the amount, but you are not actually asking what the amount is.

If you were asking, and wanted to use a question mark, it should look like this: How many people attended the concert?
OR Do you know how many people attended the concert?

Question words at the start of sentences can help sometimes. These include: what, when, where, who, whom, why, would, should, could, how, do, etc.
But that can also be misleading since we can ask questions without those words, and we can use those words in a non-question context.

For example, I can ask a question without using a question word: Remember that time we learned about question words in primary school?
Or I can use a common question word without actually asking a question: How we teach grammar is very important.

I know in informal conversation question marks are used a lot more freely (I do it myself sometimes, for emphasis or for comedy), but in formal writing you need to get it right.

Just remember, if you’re not actually asking a question, you shouldn’t use a question mark.