<![CDATA['''Apostrophe1'''<br />      Proofreading & Editing - Blog]]>Tue, 07 Apr 2020 12:31:44 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[We see what we expect to see!]]>Tue, 25 Sep 2018 09:31:40 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/we-see-what-we-expect-to-seeEditors and proofreaders often have differing views about grammatical issues but from years of scrutinising the writing of their clients they would all agree on one truth: when it comes to reading - we see what we EXPECT to see!
   A writer who has spent hours/days possibly even months composing a written piece will have the words embedded in their mind and probably have made dozens of alterations in the process. As a result, what is actually written down no longer stands out.
That is where the training and attention to detail of an editor or proofreader comes in, not to mention their detachment from the creation of the texts that they check.
A more powerful or stunning example of this phenomenon than the very recent Cathay Pacific livery blunder, I suggest, could never be found. A new aircraft emerged from the hangar after having the company livery painted along the length of the fuselage. And what did it read? 'Cathay Paciic'!!
How many employees (painters, quality inspectors, other staff) walked past that aircraft, looked at it and saw 'what they expected to see' before it was wheeled out for its  first scheduled flight? ]]><![CDATA[Digital equals slack?]]>Sat, 04 Jul 2015 03:11:53 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/digital-equals-slackIt is a common phenomenon these days, and I suppose it is understandable, maybe even inevitable, but have you noticed how often digital ‘content’ is liberally laced with errors -  grammatical or typographical?

When I read news articles online, even on the BBC website, I am disappointed to see that many of them have not been given a second reading before release into the ether. Even though I think this is poor, I have to continually remind myself (although it is a feeble excuse) of the immediacy of digital content and its (often) very short life span.

Every day millions of online words are churned out on every subject under the sun. Unlike a piece of writing that is to be printed, writing digital content is a very cheap, fast process and can reach a huge readership, instantly. Often, it seems, the (invariably sensational) title of the piece and the immediacy are what is most important to the writer, with the grammatical quality of the written content being of little concern.

But it is the huge readership aspect that worries me. For many, online reading is the only reading they do and so many readers being influenced by so much sloppy writing can only have one result – a steady degradation of writing skills and even worse, the general acceptance of that.      

]]><![CDATA[Punctuation prevents cannibalism; Grammar avoids embarrassment]]>Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:44:42 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/punctuation-prevents-cannibalism-grammar-avoids-embarrassment"Let's eat Grandma"
"Let's eat, Grandma!"

"It's not pleasant, feeling your nuts"
"It's not pleasant, feeling you're nuts" ]]><![CDATA[The Grocer's Apostrophe]]>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 22:21:20 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/the-grocers-apostropheOne of the most blatant grammatical horrors that sends any editor or proofreader into a tizzy, is the “Grocer’s Apostrophe’ – using ‘s to form the plural of words such as ‘apple’ (apple’s) ‘banana’ (banana’s) and so on and named such due to its widespread use (misuse) by these eponymous traders.

Seeing such an abuse of the (already much-abused) apostrophe causes great distress and much grumpy mumbling amongst those of us who strive, against the odds, to maintain standards in English writing.

But it is not only grocers who perpetrate this language vandalism. Last week, driving along in the Blue Mountains, I had to take a second look and then a third, at this roadside sign (see below). How could that have slipped past the combined grammar knowledge of the marketing, creative and printing teams?? It makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

 

   

Picture
]]><![CDATA[Whatever happened to 'Burmese'?]]>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 21:01:09 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/whatever-happened-to-burmeseHave you noticed how the media has, for no explicable reason, developed the habit of not using the adjectival derivative of countries’ names (i.e. the nationality) in headlines?
I have noticed this in both print and on-line news
articles.
Here are a few recent examples:
 ‘Attackers kill Nigeria Christians’
 ‘Japan whalers given ....’
 ‘Chad troops to fight .....’
 ‘Kenya army rampage’
 ‘Norway minister’s EU exit warning’
'Canada's new plastic banknotes feature Norway maple leaves instead of the Canadian sugar maple leaf.'(Why Canadian and not Norwegian???)
 ‘Paraguay peasant leader shot dead’
 Curiously, on the same webpage and immediately below     
 the headline above, it had:
 ‘Slovenian ex-PM wins presidency’ ???!! 
So why use ‘Slovenian’ if you don’t use ‘Nigerian’ or ‘Kenyan’? Where’s the justification or reasoning? 
‘Nigeria’ and ‘Kenya’ are proper nouns; they are not adjectives!
Are we seeing ‘Australia beach closed due to shark attack’ or ‘Britain man accused of ...’? Well, not yet and hopefully never. Come on media editors, do your jobs and get back to proper English!  


]]><![CDATA[Is it 'its' or 'it's'?]]>Fri, 04 Jan 2013 10:37:17 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/is-it-its-or-itsIt’s not the same as its name if it’s its number but when it’s time to send it to its owner it’s better if its belongings are included before it’s too late or its sell-by date may be past and then it’s a case of checking its condition and deciding if it’s still O.K. for its inclusion in the mix.

Phew. There, hope that clarifies this popular problem.

For further enlightenment and to report apostrophe abuse - go to this website
]]><![CDATA[Put it in writing!]]>Fri, 25 May 2012 02:21:42 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/put-it-in-writingWe have all probably heard the expression ‘put it in writing!’ Whatever its origin, its use implies the need to ensure there can be no misinterpretation or denial of the message being delivered; that the information contained is clear and unambiguous and that the recipient can rely completely on the content.

Such a need is present wherever important or official communication is taking place, and that covers most aspects of our daily life.

However, the mere act of ‘putting something in writing’ alone, does not guarantee the desired result – i.e. ruling out any misunderstanding. This only comes with the correct application of grammar – the set of rules that governs good writing.

A breathtaking example of this was a case in Canada in 2006, where a misplaced comma cost a cable television company more than $2m because a court ruled it changed the meaning of their contract with another firm.

In another scenario, in 2007, officials representing the nations of the world at the Bali Climate Change talks, spent two hours debating the insertion/deletion of a comma, such was its powerful potential effect on the meaning of a document.

Clearly, correct and appropriate punctuation matters. With it, there can only be one interpretation. Without it, there could be many and the ensuing mayhem could be both expensive and disastrous.

]]><![CDATA[Spell Check - the shaky crutch; don't lean on it too heavily!]]>Tue, 01 May 2012 06:11:29 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/spell-check-the-shaky-crutch-dont-lean-on-it-too-heavilyHow many spelling mistakes are there in this passage?

The site of his brother moving forward threw the rein maid John look up at the peak of the mountain. At its bass the cable car was stationery. He wandered what affect the reign would have on the visibility once they were there, and whose tern it was too drive from hear. 

Answer:12 - and Spell Check didn't pick up a single one.    


]]><![CDATA[How to devalue your website]]>Tue, 20 Dec 2011 05:19:59 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/how-to-devalue-your-websiteIt never ceases to amaze me that so many companies of every size spend a significant sum of money to have a professionally created website and then proceed to fill it with amateurish, poor-quality written content. As if the message they are communicating is somehow of minor importance compared to the visual appearance and functionality of the site.

The availability of Content Management Systems (CMS) has doubtless removed some of the editorial checks that might, in the past, have picked up errors.

The fastest way to devalue a website is to have content which contains errors in grammar or spelling. Any corporate image of quality, professionalism, attention to detail or care which has been previously created, is immediately destroyed and the visitor will swiftly lose interest and move on – exactly the opposite result to the one desired by the website owner.

This could all be avoided by engaging an independent proofreader/editor, an insignificant expense, given the benefits that would result.      

]]><![CDATA[Website content - the need for proofreading]]>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 21:33:10 GMThttp://www.apostrophe1.com.au/blog/website-content-the-need-for-proofreadingCould money save the English language?
Well it just might, given that any adverse effect on ‘the bottom line’ is normally taken seriously and if the recent study by an online entrepreneur is heeded. 
He reckons that millions of pounds (sterling) are being lost by internet trading companies due to bad spelling, grammar and typos etc. on their websites. With the current dangers from scams and phishing, his theory is that online shoppers, viewing this poor standard of writing, feel insecure about dealing with the company involved and leave the site in search of something with a more professional image.
He could be right.
So many companies seem to spend a large sum on having a slick website developed and then skimp on the minimal cost of engaging a professional proofreader to ensure the content is equally perfect and polished.
Poor quality content instantly devalues even the best designed website.    


 
 
]]>