Editorial Tip of the Week: Cut the Dangling Participles!

Participial phrases often add excellent descriptions to sentences, but writers should be careful to make sure the intended meaning is clear. Dangling participles loom in the margins of sentences and twist the writer’s words. While these dangling phrases are incorrect, they can be found in the copy of careful writers. When you come across participial phrases in your work, make sure that phrase connects to the intended subject.

But let’s review our terms before moving toward certain grammatical edicts.

The Chicago Manual of Style never hesitates to offer precise definitions. The fifteenth edition notes, “A participial phrase is made up of a participle plus and closely associated word or words, such as modifiers or complements.” It’s easy to spot the participle. You have to look for a modified verb stem, usually ending in ing for present participles or ed for past participles. Participial phrases come in two forms: they can function as an adjective to modify a noun or pronoun, and they can function as an adverb to modify the predicate or part of the predicate. Participial phrases modifying the subject of the sentence are the most problematic for writers, so we will focus on these phrases. Here are some examples of participial phrases to show how they work in sentences:

Snuggling into my blankets, my cat purred in the dark.

Running from the cops, the robber tripped over the curb and dropped the stolen money.

In the first example, Snuggling is the participle for the phrase into my blankets. The participial phrase Snuggling into my blankets modifies the subject cat, showing what she was doing as she purred in the dark. The second example modifies robber through the participial phrase Running from the cops. Participial phrases tend to be at the beginning of a sentence; they are usually very close to the subject being modified.

The participial phrases begin to dangle as they become disconnected from the proper subject. When the independent clause following the participial phrase does not begin with the subject modified by the participial phrase, the reader can quickly become confused. For example:

While pumping my gas, my car began to roll backward.

It seems that the car is both beginning to roll and pumping my gas. Rephrasing the uncanny ability of my car to pump my gas, I have two easy alternatives that offer more clarity. I can use the correct subject in the participial phrase, or I can begin the independent clause with the correct subject. Here are the two corrected versions of this sentence:

While I was pumping my gas, my car began to roll backward.

While pumping my gas, I noticed my car was rolling backward.

These introductory phrases clearly express that I—and not a futuristic car—was pumping the gas. We have cut the dangling participles!

There are two types of sentences prone to creating dangling participles. When using participial phrases, you should not start the independent clause with there is, there are, or it is. The Copywriter’s Handbook also notes, “Dangling is also inevitable when the independent clause is headed by a verb.” Here are a few examples of these dangling participles:

Reading the reports from the front line, it is unsafe for our army to advance any more.

Awakened by the thunderstorm, there is no chance of me going back to bed.

Watching the sunrise, getting up early was her greatest pleasure.

While eating the chocolate bar, trying to drive was very difficult for Paul.

These phrases can be corrected as easily as our first examples. We can either insert the correct subject in the first clause, or we can begin the independent clause with the proper subject. Here are two corrected versions of these examples:

After I was awakened by the thunderstorm, there is no chance of me going back to bed.

While eating the chocolate bar, Paul found driving to be very difficult.

Always pay attention to the participial phrases in your writing. Although the concept may make sense in your head, you should be sure that your sentences clearly communicate your thoughts.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Count me in!

Numbers (and their sibling, mathematics) can be the bane of any writer. When should a writer use numerals and symbols? When should a writer spell the number out? The rules for writing numbers can be vague and tend to vary from source to source.

When writing a technical or scientific piece, it is often necessary to use numerals to convey the data clearly to the reader. In most journalistic writing, the space on the page is given the highest priority. The style of the Associated Press dictates that journalists spell out both cardinal and ordinal numbers one through nine while suggesting that the writers use numerals in other cases.

A writer must strive for consistency and readability when dealing with numbers. The Chicago Manual of Style, fifteenth edition, offers wise words for writers struggling with proper usage. Chicago structures its conventions around one general rule: “whole numbers from one through one hundred, round numbers, and any number beginning a sentence” should be spelled out. Others should be written using numerals.

Two hundred and twenty-one rabbits were found living in the abandoned house.
Seventeen of the students were twenty-two-years old.
There were nearly two thousand people in the coliseum.
We’re going to party like it’s 1999!
I counted 3,397 bricks in the pathway of our neighborhood park.

The round numbers of Chicago are hundreds, thousands, millions, or higher round values. These round numbers should be spelled out. When a writer wishes to express a very large number (usually in the millions, billions, or higher), a combination of numerals and spelled out numbers is recommended for readability.

Recent research suggests that the Big Bang occurred around 13.3 and 13.9 billion years ago.
As of the 2000 census, there are an estimated 1.2 billion people living in Mainland China.

Simple fractions should be spelled out. Numbers involving whole numbers and fractions are often written in numerals, but may be spelled out if they are short. Percentages should always be written in numerals. As Chicago is quick to note, the word percent should be used in humanistic writings.

I finished writing two-thirds of my essay before falling asleep.
I woke up the next morning with 33 percent of my work left to do.
She took meticulous notes her 2½ x 4-inch index cards.

As a general rule, strive toward consistency and readability when using numbers. These conventions should provide some support when using numbers, but there will always be traditional exceptions. It’s much easier to tell someone to pick up a 60-watt light bulb than a sixty-watt light bulb. It makes more sense to use a 12-point font than a twelve-point font. If you consider your reader as you write, using numbers will be as easy as one, two, three.

For more information on using numbers when dealing with money, please read Martha's tip.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Wordiness (Part II)

Continuing last week's discussion of wordiness, let's consider a few more examples of verbiage. Although some of these phrases can add a bit of flavor to one's writing, they often appear as overused expressions. Communicating an idea or feeling is at the heart of writing—strive to be direct and to avoid useless phrases with the aim of better communication. Here are a few more examples to reconsider when you find them in your work:

inasmuch as. Although this phrase is grammatically correct, it tends to stick out like a sore thumb... or a cliché. Both since and because are more manageable alternatives.

in connection with. Our Chicago pulls no punches when calling this example a "vague, fuzzy phrase." The manual provides of, related to, associated with, about, and for as possible variations to use.

in the affirmative. While this phrase has the connotation of being more formal, it is usually easier to simply state that the answer is yes. The CMS reminds us that the correct way to punctuate the proper phrase is he said yes—using no quotation marks or capitalization.

in the near future. Why waste words when you can use one? Try using soon or shortly.

question as to whether. This phrase seems to be particularly needless for William Strunk, Jr. In the Elements of Style, he lists this phrase as the primary offender of using unnecessary words. The word whether or the phrase question whether will usually do a better job of presenting the information concisely.

As we strive to best convey our messages, remember that we are not trying to strip the life out of every sentence. We don't want to reduce our writing to the most rudimentary sketches. Instead we should take away the needless words so that our words continuously convey ideas and feelings. As Strunk wrote:

Vigorous writing is concise. A sentence should contain no unnecessary words, a paragraph no unnecessary sentences, for the same reason that a drawing should have no unnecessary lines and a machine no unnecessary parts. This requires not that the writer make all his sentences short, or that he avoid all detail and treat his subjects only in outline, but that every word tell.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Wordiness (Part I)

In which our Editorial Assistant begins to address the fact that many writers should examine their proclivity for using many words when fewer words would better serve their purposes.

"Be Clear" and "Omit Needless Words"

William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White offer this resolute advice to readers of Elements of Style. Although contemporary linguists have taken issue with a few grammar rules in this ubiquitous book, Elements continues to offer positive criticism for writers of all stages of development. Statements like “Be Clear” and “Omit Needless Words” may seem vague and needless, but there is sound advice in trying to avoid wordiness.

Here are a few examples to examine when found in your writing:

as far as. This phrase is often used where as for would work better. Also consider concerning and regarding as concise alternatives.

as of yet. This clumsy phrase can easily be shortened. The Chicago Manual of Style recommends yet, still, and so far as possible variants.

as per. Although the phrase may sound fitting in business correspondence, it should not stray from that domain. To sound less like a character from the Dilbert comic strip, consider revising the sentence to use as or according to.

at the present time. This dry phrase is best avoided for simpler (and clearer) choices. Writers should choose now or one of its synonyms: anymore, currently, nowadays, presently, right now, or today.

by means of. Writers can often shorten this phrase to by. The CMS suggests with as another logical substitute.

due to the fact that. Our big orange style guide provides the succinct because as a replacement. Strunk took greater issue with the phrase, noting in his original version of Elements of Style: “the expression the fact that should be revised out of every sentence in which it occurs.” Thankfully (and characteristically), he provides a list of more concise expressions.

These are only a few examples of verbose phrases, but they serve as gentle warnings. Careful writers will keep keep these in mind when considering the instruction of Strunk and White: "Be Clear." Tune in next week for more signposts toward clarity, more troubling examples of wordiness.

Editorial Tip of the Week: You keep using [decimate]—I do not think it means what you think it means.

This week’s tip can be summed up in one sentence:

Although the word decimate has recently become accepted as meaning to cause great harm or damage, the word has a dark history, reaching back to the Roman practice of punishing a group of soldiers by having them kill every tenth man in their ranks by drawing lots to determine their fate.

But let us never pass an opportunity to learn. Let us blow the dust off a few ancient tomes as we delve deeper into definition of decimation.

The word decimate comes from the Latin decimatus, meaning “the removal of a tenth.” The first recorded use of this practice appears in Livy’s History of Rome. After being unsuccessful in war with the Volsci in 471 BC, Claudius decimates his troops for not following his orders:

The soldiers being at length collected from their scattered rout, the consul, after he had in vain followed his men for the purpose of rallying them, pitched his camp in a peaceful part of the country; and an assembly being convened, after inveighing not without good reason against the army, as traitors to military discipline, deserters of their posts, frequently asking them, one by one, where were their standards, where their arms; he first beat with rods and then beheaded those soldiers who had thrown down their arms, the standard-bearers who had lost their standards, and moreover the centurions, and those with the double allowance, who had left their ranks. With respect to the rest of the multitude, every tenth man was drawn by lot for punishment. [My emphasis]

While we have added definitions to the word, instances of this horrific practice of decimation can be found as recently as World War I and the Finnish Civil War. Douglas Harper traces the origins of the common definition to the 17^th century, noting that decimates "has been used (incorrectly, to the irritation of pedants) since 1660s for destroy a large portion of."

Perhaps this week’s title was a bit hyperbolic, as inconceivable as that may seem. However, decimate has become a darling word of bloggers trying to ink an interesting headline, and it always helps to know the different definitions of a particular word. Remember our salmon style guide when you question the proper use of decimate. The Chicago Manual of Style states, "Avoid decimate (1) when you are referring to complete destruction or (2) when a percentage is specified." Annihilate will suffice as an alternative of the first type, while destroy generally fits the discussion of percentages lost.

Take the time to discover the history of the words you use. Wield your pen with precision.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Words and Phrases to Avoid (Part II)

Building upon last week’s selection of words and phrases to avoid, this week’s editorial tip features five more troublesome expressions.

in regards to. The Grammar Girl recently wrote in regard to this phrase. The s can simple be dropped to correct the phrase, but often a single word can better fit the sentence. Try using concerning, regarding, or about when you have the urge to pen a suitable preposition.

irregardless. Although this word appears often in dialog, it is not yet an excepted phrase. Meriam-Webster OnLine traces the etymology of the phrase to a probable “blend of irrespective and regardless.” It would benefit writers to choose one of the unmixed words.

pled. The correct past-tense and past-participial forms of the verb to plead is pleaded. The incorrect form has proliferated in the legal community, but journalists and writers should stick to the traditional spelling. But be warned: the argument over the correct form is a sensitive subject.

utilize. This word seems to be the darling of both advertising campaigns and writers hoping to sound a bit more grandiose. However, this word should often be replaced by use to convey the same meaning without the tinge of pretentiousness.

esquivalience. The New Oxford American Dictionary defines this word as “the willful avoidance of one’s official responsibilities.” You will not find esquivalience in any other dictionary; the word was a fictitious entry used to protect copyright. Sometimes it is hard to know what to trust in the strange world of language.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Words and Phrases to Avoid (Part I)

Nonsensical phrases and butchered words continue to plague our language, working their way into the pages of even the most meticulous writers. These phrases have become commonplace; they pass as correct in most word processing software. However, we should take up the pen in the interest of clarity. We can make steps toward becoming better authors by striking these words and phrases from our vocabularies. Here are five words and phrases to avoid, with another installment coming next week.

alright. Avoid the single word use of this expression. The Miriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary notes, "The one-word spelling alright appeared some 75 years after all right itself had reappeared from a 400-year-long absence." Although the word continues to be used, writers should stick to the proper two-word phrase.

cohabitate. This word seems to have found its niche in online relationship forums and celebrity gossip magazines. But, our salmon style guide reminds us that cohabitate is “a back-formation of cohabitation.” We already have a perfectly useful verb that has the same meaning as this latecomer: cohabit. Writers would be wise use the traditional verb.

could care less. This phrase is nonsensical in its typical application. Writers should use couldn’t care less when expressing disinterest... unless they are writing dialogue for contemporary characters.

enthused. A back-formation of enthusiasm, this word has a continual presence on blogs and with those seeking a word rhyming with use. Although the word has been present since the early nineteenth-century, Miriam-Webster states, "It has been disapproved since about 1870." Writers enthusiastic about proper grammar should seek a suitable alternative to this avoidable word.

hone in. This phrase has been become prevalent in reporting and may eventually become the correct way to express moving toward a target. Writers should home in on the correct phrase to use in troublesome situation. The word hone means the sharpening of a blade, but the simple slip of a consonant may soon provide the word with another accepted meaning.

[Tune in next week for five more words and phrases to avoid.]

Editorial Tip of the Week: The Italic Job

Italic type was first produced in the beginning of the 16^th century as a cursive typeface, one based on calligraphic handwriting of the Italian humanist Poggo Bracciolini. Whereas the typeface was originally used to print very compact yet legible volumes, italics are currently used to emphasize particular titles, names, phrases, words, and symbols within text set to roman type.

Writers should use italics sparingly to emphasize particular words or phrases. If words or phrases appear italicized too often, they quickly lose their force. Writers can usually vary the sentence structure to provide force to the emphasized words rather than relying on italics to carry the weight of the sentence.

The monster was found under the bed.

Yes, but what do you think of the chocolate cookies?

Unfamiliar words and phrases from foreign languages should be italicized, but familiar foreign words–those often used in English–do not need to be placed in italics. If a foreign word or phrase is used multiple times in a text, only the first instance needs to be italicized.

The motto of my state is esse quam videri.

Sheepskin boots were popular a few years ago, but now they seem passé.

If a word or phrase is used to reference the word or phrase itself, the term should be italicized. These nonfunctional terms may also be set in quotation marks, but italics are the traditional format. This case of nonfunctional terms also applies to letters used as letters; these letters should be italicized.

What is the definition of antidisestablishmentarianism?

Excuse me, sir. How many p’s are in your name?

When used correctly, italics can add force to your sentence, allowing a reader to make a distinction between a word or phrase and the rest of the sentence. From its origins as a separate typeface, italics serve numerous uses alongside roman type. However, it takes careful consideration to master italics.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Semicolon (Part II)

Continued from Part I of this article.

The semicolon should be used to separate items in a list or series that have internal punctuation. In this use, the semicolon helps to clarify the series, keeping the reader from being confused with the division of the commas.

The four housemates are all in their thirties: Caitlin, 34; Matt, 37; Stephen, 31; Brendan, 36.

After work Brendan, trying to return home as quickly as possible, ran to the bus; gave the bus driver, who gave him a scowl, two dollars; and squeezed into a seat between two passengers.

When using a semicolon with clauses that end in parenthesis or brackets, the semicolon should be placed after the closing parenthesis or bracket. When a sentence uses a quote and a semicolon, the semicolon should follow the closing quotation mark unless the semicolon comes from the quoted material.

The semicolon should be used to separate independent clauses and items in a series that have internal punctuation; this punctuation mark demonstrates an attempt to clarify, a way of connecting two or more related thoughts. If you want to revisit the rules of the semicolon, this comic does a great job of explaining the basic uses of this punctuation. While the semicolon remains a debated figure in contemporary grammar, Lewis Thomas in Medusa and the Snail (Viking Press, 1979) touches upon the simple elegance of the semicolon:

It is almost always a greater pleasure to come across a semicolon than a period. The period tells you that is that; if you didn't get all the meaning you wanted or expected, anyway you got all the writer intended to parcel out and now you have to move along. But with a semicolon there you get a pleasant little feeling of expectancy; there is more to come; read on; it will get clearer.

For more information see sections 6.57-62 in the Chicago Manual of Style.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Semicolon (Part I)

Somewhere between the divider and the full stop, the comma and the period, stands the semicolon. A gentle pause, the semicolon can perform the functions of either of these two forms of punctuation. While proper use of the semicolon was once cause for duels, the mark has seen a decline in usage over the past two centuries. The end of this curious mark may loom nearby, but we must strive to understand the proper use (and the possible joys) of the semicolon.

The semicolon is most often used to separate two independent clauses not joined by a conjunction. These clauses should be related, the latter modifying or clarifying the former.

My cats have grown close; I often find them snuggling in the chairs of my house.

The Chicago Manual of Style, fifteenth edition, is careful to point: "The following adverbs, among others, should be preceded by a semicolon when used transitionally between independent clauses: then, however, thus, hence, indeed, accordingly, besides, and therefore."

My house became cold in December; however, my cats adjusted quickly by sleeping under the covers of my bed.

The semicolon may also be used to separate a clarifying clause from the initial independent clause. It is most common in this case to use the semicolon before phrases such as "that is" or "namely."

We should expect vast changes for the company in the coming year; that is, we should prepare to cut costs on future projects.

Our salmon style guide notes that the semicolon may be used before a conjunction when the conjunction separates two independent clauses. While a comma is typically used in this situation, the semicolon is helpful when the independent clauses have internal punctuation.

Our company was focusing on publishing works of fiction; but requests from new clients, in addition to calls from our current authors, pushed us to accept more works of poetry.

Continue reading in Part II of this article.

Editorial Tip of the Week: Affecting the Effect

Do you sometimes pause while writing and have to wonder if your choice between affect and effect was the right one?

The mystery remains.

Take a moment to look up the words in the dictionary or online. You could come away with a whole new meaning.

Try the online dictionary: www.m-w.com