Is Grammar Really That Important Any More?

[JSC_1]

Of course grammar is important. However, when it gets to rules that are so complicated and obscure that you have to look it up in 15 different sources, then it gets a little tiresome, and I wonder if it's all that important.

[LuvReadin]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

.
We need to find ways to involve professional editors in self-publishing without that simply becoming another way for self-styled entrepreneurs to hoodwink the abnormally ungifted into paying for incompetence.

Excellent point. A good place to start is trade organisation for editors in your country (the Society for Editors and Proofreaders in the UK; the Society for Editors in Australia; the American Copyeditors Assocation; Editors' Association of Canada, etc.), but bear in mind that membership isn't necessarily a guarantee of quality, and lack of membership doesn't mean the editor's not worth looking at. More important (IMHO!) is to have an editor who is familiar with the medium (I wouldn't hire a fiction editor to work on a technical manual, or vice versa, because they're two quite different disciplines). Also, consider having an editor (not necessarily the same one) if there's any specialist knowledge required; for instance, if the book is about a crime-fighting duo of gardeners, or a mystery-solving pathologist, then unless the author knows these subjects very well, a couple of hours of an expert's time to check that the technical aspects are correct is likely to be money well spent. Readers come from all walks of life, and they will spot if the Latin name isn't capitalised correctly or the flowers are blooming at the wrong time of year!

[Prestidigitweeze]

That might have been the best advice on editorial tasking ever posted on Mobile Read. Do expect the MR equivalent of flowers at your door.

Also, consider having an editor (not necessarily the same one) if there's any specialist knowledge required; for instance, if the book is about a crime-fighting duo of gardeners, or a mystery-solving pathologist, then unless the author knows these subjects very well, a couple of hours of an expert's time to check that the technical aspects are correct is likely to be money well spent. Readers come from all walks of life, and they will spot if the Latin name isn't capitalised correctly or the flowers are blooming at the wrong time of year!

These are touches which most publishers I've known don't think about, perhaps because there's always a fixed amount to spend on the editorial budget. On the nether hind, I'm inclined to consider the idea myself for books which are expected to be very high profile.

[LuvReadin]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

That might have been the best advice on editorial tasking ever posted on Mobile Read. Do expect the MR equivalent of flowers at your door.

Oh, you're too kind!

[HarryT]

Both Grammar and Grandpa are important.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by LuvReadin

Excellent point. A good place to start is trade organisation for editors in your country (the Society for Editors and Proofreaders in the UK; the Society for Editors in Australia; the American Copyeditors Assocation; Editors' Association of Canada, etc.), but bear in mind that membership isn't necessarily a guarantee of quality, and lack of membership doesn't mean the editor's not worth looking at. More important (IMHO!) is to have an editor who is familiar with the medium (I wouldn't hire a fiction editor to work on a technical manual, or vice versa, because they're two quite different disciplines). Also, consider having an editor (not necessarily the same one) if there's any specialist knowledge required; for instance, if the book is about a crime-fighting duo of gardeners, or a mystery-solving pathologist, then unless the author knows these subjects very well, a couple of hours of an expert's time to check that the technical aspects are correct is likely to be money well spent. Readers come from all walks of life, and they will spot if the Latin name isn't capitalised correctly or the flowers are blooming at the wrong time of year!

I agree. Incorrect Latin is my personal pet peeve in books. I see it much more often than one would think. An expert to do fact checking would be money well spent.

[crossi]

Grammer as currently constituted is not a lot of use in providing precise meaning. Mathematics does it better. Old men and women could mean old (men and women) or (old men) and women. Parental controls could mean something controlled by parents or something to control parents. Is it even possible to have a language without any ambiguity? English certainly is not one.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I agree. Incorrect Latin is my personal pet peeve in books. I see it much more often than one would think. An expert to do fact checking would be money well spent.

If only black metal bands hired Latin editors before naming themselves and their albums.

[Lycoming]

Correct usage of grammar and punctuation creates meaningful communication.

Punctuation is often used incorrectly. "So what?" You may ask. Well in these modern times where this internettyweb is the usual form of attempting to get your message across, a bit of punctuation may turn what appears to be a tirade into a sensible articulate argument. Then a discussion may take place, rather than an aggressive inarticulate foaming at the keyboard.

The greatest loss to future generations is inflection, the mood, modulation and intonation of a point being made.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

If only black metal bands hired Latin editors before naming themselves and their albums.

Thanks for the link! I will have fun looking through the entries!

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I agree. Incorrect Latin is my personal pet peeve in books. I see it much more often than one would think. An expert to do fact checking would be money well spent.

Si hoc signum legere potes, operis boni in rebus Latinis alacribus et fructuosis potiri potes!

[pruss]

Originally Posted by Justin Nemo

In this new mobile world where R U OK, C U 2nite, LMAO and ROLF actually mean something, does it really matter anymore if what you write is grammatically correct?

This sort of stuff won't wipe out the distinction between good and bad grammar, but simply contribute to the constant mutation of the language and shift what is and what is not good grammar. "R U OK" may become good grammar, spelling and punctuation, but "R OK U" will likely be bad grammar.

Much of good standard contemporary English grammar would have sounded terrible a couple of hundred years ago. These things change. There is a value in their not changing too fast--change impedes communication between generations--but the fact of change should be accepted.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by pruss

Much of good standard contemporary English grammar would have sounded terrible a couple of hundred years ago. These things change. There is a value in their not changing too fast--change impedes communication between generations--but the fact of change should be accepted.

Certainly grammar changes - English didn't have a "continuous present" at the time that Shakespeare was writing, for example ("I am going", "you are reading", etc.) - but there's a difference between grammatical changes and not knowing the difference between "its" and "it's"; the latter is just dumb ignorance which there's absolutely no excuse or reason for.

[Justin Nemo]

Originally Posted by pruss

This sort of stuff won't wipe out the distinction between good and bad grammar, but simply contribute the constant mutation of the language and shift what is and what is not good grammar. "R U OK" may become good grammar, spelling and punctuation, but "R OK U" will likely be bad grammar.

Much of good standard contemporary English grammar would have sounded terrible a couple of hundred years ago. These things change. There is a value in their not changing too fast--change impedes communication between generations--but the fact of change should be accepted.

UR Gr8

[pruss]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Certainly grammar changes - English didn't have a "continuous present" at the time that Shakespeare was writing, for example ("I am going", "you are reading", etc.) - but there's a difference between grammatical changes and not knowing the difference between "its" and "it's"; the latter is just dumb ignorance which there's absolutely no excuse or reason for.

Right now, yes. But the difference in spelling might one day disappear. And we may be seeing it disappear. Orthography is defined by the practices of the language users. (Not in any simple majority way, though.)