Quote:
Originally Posted by WPotocki
Smarmy. Proofread or not - it ain't right. At least I write the garbage I produce. And I say that proudly.  |
Right on. But the real question is, is it really garbage? That's the thing I'm learning -- these 'weird' ways of writing things, that happen to feel "right" as we record them, are not garbage. And they're not incorrect once one delves deeper into the subject of grammar.
One example is the "then is not a conjunction" argument that has raged for who-knows how long. I was talking with another author recently who noted that their editor made them go back and add 'and' to precede every 'then' when used like a conjunction. OMG! I've already struggled with this myself since I TOTALLY prefer the lack of 'and' in nearly 90% of the cases where I write something like "he opened the door, then dashed into the street." I figure EB White said omit needless words, and to me, in this case 'and' is a needless word. We understand the sentence without it, yes?
But some editors will insist that it's improper grammar without the and, since 'then' is not a proper conjunction.
WRONG.
I finally found a great source that explains it. At last!
Listen to this podcast. It's beautiful.
http://www.copyediting.com/wordpress/?p=314
When 'then' is used in this manner, it even has its own grammatical description:
Enumerative adverbial conjunct.
(not that I completely understand that upon dissecting it, but it does sound cool).
To the sticklers I say, stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
My style of using 'then' in this manner does not bother my editor, thank goodness (and unlike me, she has degrees in creative writing and English, etc., so I trust her judgment). And my quirky style hasn't bothered any readers, either, but I have seen talk about it here and there. Again, my personal justification was the omit needless words mantra. Now it's rock-solid.
The other that comes to mind is the 'tight versus tightly' argument, which expands to include a number of other perhaps not fully qualified adverbs. I studied some about this last night, and again found some great material regarding "flat" adverbs as they are called (at least for me, uneducated as I am, it's just nice getting a name for this example of 'garbage' grammar at last). Hold on tight, drive slow, get us out of here quick, etc. If you want to get all stuffy about it, they should have -ly on the end. The most fascinating portion of the research revealed that flat adverbs were much more popular centuries ago but in the modern age they have somehow become looked down upon. Not popular doesn't equate to wrong.
Fascinating stuff, and I suspect like me, your "garbage" is actually effective prose. I'm proud of my crap, too.
(SMILE)