Let’s Eat Grandma!
I had planned to title this blog and newsletter “The Comma of Direct Address.” But “Let’s Eat Grandma!” is so much more inviting. Thanks to both Jeff and Eric for this topic – and the frighteningly identical example.
Note that almost every online source about the comma of direct address uses this example. I wonder why it’s always poor Grandma …
(By the way, this is a stock photo, so no grandmas have been harmed in the writing of this blog and newsletter.)
Once again, the rule about the comma of direct address is basic: If you are writing or speaking to someone or a group of someones by name, add a comma before or after the name, depending on how you are addressing that person or persons. For example:
Grandma, please come to the store with me.
Let’s eat, Grandma!
I’m not sure, Grandma and Grandpa, if you really want to do that.
As the words in this blog title versus those in the second example show, omitting the comma could be deadly.
The late Peter Schickele (aka P.D.Q. Bach) embraced the comical nature of a misused comma of direct address in his lovely four-part choir piece for Christmas titled “Throw the Yule Log On, Uncle John.” The first line clearly delineates the meaning of the words: It is asking Uncle John to throw the yule log on (presumably, the fire). The melody of the second line, however, makes a musical break after the word “log.” Thus, the listeners hear this: “Throw the Yule log / On Uncle John.” Like Grandma, Uncle John may not survive the missing comma. Find a YouTube video of a choir singing this piece; it really is fun.
One more example: “Here’s the gift I bought Sandra.” Or, “Here’s the gift I bought, Sandra.” They mean very different things.
Along similar lines, what about greetings? In dialogue in a manuscript, you may write or read a character saying these things, with the comma of direct address:
Hi, Tomas.
Hello, Dad.
Hey, Buddy.
However, in casual e-mails, the latest common consensus is to omit the comma. Grammar purists may argue, but I think omitting the comma is clear enough:
Hi Tomas:
Hello Dad:
Hey Buddy:
Friends, just don’t ever add a comma after “Dear” in an e-mail greeting. The word “dear” serves as an adjective in this case. Thanks, Fran, for the “hi” question. And, readers, do you realize that the first, third, and fourth sentences in this paragraph use the comma of direct address?
On the writing front, the editing of Nathan and Sophia’s story is moving along. If you know any lawyers who might like to check my content on Nathan’s paralegal work, please let me know.
I do love to edit, but I’m also totally enjoying writing these blogs. Please share this with any of your grammar-nerd friends, like me, who might be interested. And sign up at the bottom of my home page to get this blog as a monthly newsletter.
Is That a Real Word?
Most of us remember the old adage “Ain’t ain’t in the dictionary.” Because of that expression, we knew we were not supposed to use that nonstandard term.
However, today, and probably even when we were children, ain’t is in the dictionary. It is listed as a nonstandard contraction for “am not, are not, is not, have not, and has not.” Many dictionaries also note that the contraction is used in popular culture and for emphasis. My musical-loving friends will cite it in songs like “Ain’t Misbehaving” or “He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother.”
You see, dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive, meaning that they list words that have become common in everyday language. Some of us purists balk at that, but there’s history to it.
For one of my master’s classes, I wrote a paper analyzing the book The Story of English by Robert McCrum, Robert MacNeil, and William Cran, which is now in its third edition. Two facts stood out:
William Shakespeare invented as many as 1,700 words, some of which were in common use during his time but not yet considered “words.”
According to estimates from my 1986 version of the book, English has 500,000 words compared to 185,000 German words and fewer than 100,00 for the French. Nearly 30 years later, the numbers are probably larger, but I’m betting the percentages are the same.
The conclusion is that we English speakers like to mess with words. Here are some examples of said messing and my biased opinions on each:
Making up a word that is similar to and means the same thing as another word: irregardless, which means the same thing as “regardless” – for example, “Irregardless of how you acted last night, I still love you.” Yes, it’s a word that has been around since the early 20th century, maybe even the late 18th century as a combination of irrespective and regardless. Roseann’s take: Despite its presence in dictionaries, irregardless is still almost universally considered “wrong.” I wouldn’t use it.
Using an existing word in a way it was not originally intended: impact as a verb meaning “to have an effect (impact) on” – for example, “That fact impacts the way I see the world.” According to the Merriam-Webster’s grammar site, we began arguing against the figurative use of impact as an intransitive verb in the early 20th century. By the late 20th century, we had embraced it. Ah, but we hate to be told not to do something! Roseann’s take: I’m fuzzy on this one. Since impact originally related to a collision, the verb has moved us away from that. I’m not opposed to it, but I tend to use affect or influence more often.
Changing the spelling of an existing word: the adverb underway as one word, as opposed to the two words of under way, meaning “in motion” – for example, “After piling into the car, we were underway.” The original one-word spelling was for use only as an adjective – for example, “Our underway trip is going to take eight hours.” Most dictionaries list underway, one word, as an adjective first and then an adverb, saying “also, under way.” Roseann’s take: I bow to peer pressure on this one and go with one word as the adverb.
Overuse of curse words: I’m not one who curses; I just never picked up the habit. However, curse words have their place, especially in times of deep distress. When a person overuses a word such as the F word or the S word, then when he or she really needs to let loose, those words no longer have their power. Similar to times that a speaker overuses a standard phrase, such as “actually” or “you know,” overcursing simply sounds as if the speaker needs to improve his or her vocabulary. Roseann’s take: Ask yourself, “Would I say this to my kindergarten teacher?” And if you have time to ask yourself that, then it’s not a time of distress, and you don’t need to curse. Just between us, I’m often more offended by taking the Lord’s name in vain, such as the use of JC as a curse. (Check out Beem Weeks’s blog “To Cuss or Not to Cuss: Swear Words in Fiction.”)
If you haven’t read my books yet, I can tell you that they feature no cursing, as well as no use of irregardless. And April 3 through 7, the e-book version of All for Good is free on Amazon.
Oh, I finished the first draft of Nathan and Sophia’s story, tentatively titled A New Heart. On to the editing!
Please sign up for my monthly newsletter for grammar tips and the occasional romance-author interview. And let me know what you think about the words from this blog or any other words or grammar pet peeves you have.
Me, Myself, and I: Reflexive Pronouns
I love having my friends share their language pet peeves with me. The struggle with pronouns is a big one. Thanks for this one, Evelyn.
We touched on figuring out how to use certain pronouns when we talked about hypercorrectness. When there are multiple pronouns at the end of a sentence, the tip is to take out the others to determine which pronoun you need. You wouldn’t say, “She gave it to he and I” because you wouldn’t say, “She gave it to he” or “She gave it to I.”
Another tough area is reflexive pronouns. Pronouns ending in “-self” or “-selves” are called reflexive. There are nine of them: myself, yourself, himself, herself, itself, oneself, ourselves, yourselves, and themselves. As you can see, the singular pronouns end in “-self,” and the plural pronouns end in “-selves.”*
Use reflexive pronouns to communicate the following information:
Indicate that the object of the sentence is the same person or thing as the subject of the sentence. That is, the persons or things having something done to them are the same persons or things doing that action:
She looked at herself the mirror.
They did this to themselves.
The dog scratched itself.
Emphasize something about the subject of the sentence; in this usage, the reflexive pronoun usually immediately follows the subject but not always:
I myself don’t like spicy food.
Children, you yourselves are responsible for this mess.
He can do this himself.
Do not use reflexive pronouns in these ways:
Don’t use them when the subject is different than the object:
Incorrect: He gave that book to myself. <Correct: He gave that book to me.>
Incorrect: I did that for herself. <Correct: I did that for her.>
Don’t use them as a hypercorrect subject, usually accidentally done in situations of a compound subject:
Incorrect: She and myself will head up the lesson for today. <Correct: She and I will head up the lesson for the day.>
Don’t make up reflexive pronouns that are not true pronouns; one hint is that reflexive pronouns are never possessive:
Incorrect: He did it hisself.
Incorrect: They made it theirselves.
*Exception: You can use the word “themself” when the singular subject of the sentence is gender neutral or when you don’t know the gender: “The leader might think themself a fool.” However, many writers still use the plural “themselves.”
On the writing front, I’m about 2,000 words away from finishing book 4, Nathan and Sophia’s story. Then the rewrites begin, which is truly my favorite part of writing.
I will leave you with one of my beloved reflexive-pronoun examples, from Dr. Seuss’s How the Grinch Stole Christmas: “And he, he himself ... the Grinch … carved the roast-beast.”
Please tell me your grammar pet peeves. I’m making a list for future newsletter/blog topics.
That Versus Which
My critique group suggested this month’s topic. Although I love them, they made it tough on me. To determine when to use “that” and when to use “which” is difficult. When I’m finished my attempt at explanation, please comment below to let me know if I cleared things up or made them muddier.
Use the relative pronoun “that” with a restrictive clause and the relative pronoun “which” with a nonrestrictive clause. Don’t use a comma before “that,” and almost always use a comma before “which.”
I’m done.
Okay, here are the details: A restrictive clause is text that is essential to the sentence. In fact, some people call restrictive clauses “essential clauses.” This means that if you remove the clause, the rest of the sentence won’t make any sense or at least it won’t carry the meaning you intended. The word “that” introduces something specific. Here are examples of “that” used in restrictive clauses, with the restrictive clause highlighted in bold:
The pen that is on the right side of the table is out of ink. [This means that, of all the pens on the table, the specific pen that is on the right side is out of ink.]
Blankets that collect dust are not allowed in the laboratory. [The specific type of blankets that collect dust are not allowed; other types of blankets may be permitted.]
Here is a funny proverb that changed my life. [This specific proverb changed my life.]
The socks that my mother gave me have Christmas wreaths on them. [Of all the socks I own, the ones that my mother gave me have wreaths on them.]
A nonrestrictive clause is text that you as a writer want to include, but it’s not necessary to the main meaning of the sentence. It may be valuable information, but the sentence will still make sense without it. The pronoun “which” introduces that added information. For example:
The pen, which is on the right side of the table, is out of ink. [The main sentence is “The pen is out of ink.” However, as a writer, I’m supplying more information to help the reader locate the pen: on the right side of the table.]
Blankets, which collect dust, are not allowed in the laboratory. [The main sentence is “Blankets are not allowed in the laboratory.” However, I’m adding information to explain why all blankets are not allowed: because they collect dust.]
Here is a funny proverb, which changed my life. [This proverb is funny, and by the way, it changed my life.]
The socks, which my mother gave me, have Christmas wreaths on them. [The main sentence is “The socks have Christmas wreaths on them.” I just want you to know that my mother gave them to me.]
Sometimes, it’s clear that you must use “that”:
My favorite earrings are the ones that have my book cover on them. [You couldn’t stop the sentence at “ones.”]
Where are the things that I left in your car? [“Where are the things?” could not stand by itself.
Other times, as in the two socks examples above, it’s up to the writer to decide which meaning is desired.
Below is an excerpt of my next book in which I chose to make a clause restrictive by using “that,” even though I could have made it nonrestrictive and used “which.” This character is Bruce, the boss of the heroine Sophia. Bruce is sexist, verbally abusive, and just generally icky. He has told Sophia that their fitness center is being sued, and when she responds with shock, this is what he says (restrictive clause in bold; Robbins is the name of a law firm):
When Bruce shook his head, his jowls wagged. “Don’t get your pretty little self in a tizzy. It’s a simple workplace harassment suit that will go away because there’s no proof for stuff like that. They’ll probably settle.” He pointed a big finger at Sophia. “But you can help by prancing around for that Robbins guy who just came in. Nothing huge; just bat your eyes. Take him out to dinner. Find out what their lawyers know. Who are they talking to? What could they possibly use against us? Get him to make it easier for our side.” He waved the back of his hand toward her. “Go. Now.”
With “that,” the clause defines the simple harassment suit. According to Bruce, it’s the kind that will go away.
Note that the hardest part of doing these blogs is coming up with unique examples. Feel free to share your own, especially ones that reveal the different meanings when using “that” or “which.”
And yes, sometimes you can eliminate “that” in a restrictive clause and sometimes you must use “who”—these are topics for another month.
Happy new year!
It’s Beginning to Look a Lot Like Christmas
On December 17, please, please check out this blog site (two days from the date of this newsletter for those of us weaker in math skills!). Fellow author Liz Flaherty (see the October blog interview) asked me to write an essay for her series of holiday blogs. I’ve written about the first Christmas with our children, and I’m very happy with the final story. I loved sharing a special time and an indelible memory.
Here in my own blog this month, I want to cover a cornucopia of holiday-related topics.
First, let’s talk about language. When I mentioned to coworker editors that I would be covering some holiday grammar issues, they jumped on it right away. Here are some language pet peeves at this time of year:
Signing your Christmas cards as The Walkers’ or The Walker’s: Your family is not possessive in and of itself. (See the August blog.) You are the Walkers, plural.
Writing “Merry Xmas”: It’s okay to abbreviate Christmas as Xmas. The X stands for the Greek letter chi, which is the first letter in the word Christ. Therefore, “Xmas” is “Christmas.” It is not “taking the Christ out of Christmas.” In fact, it’s keeping “Christ” in.
Capitalizing “Eve”: Use initial capitalization for the word “Eve” if it is officially part of the holiday name: Christmas Eve, New Year’s Eve, and even All Hallows Eve. Lowercase it if it’s the night before a holiday but not part of the official holiday name: Thanksgiving eve, Valentine’s eve, and so on.
·Spelling the holiday Hanukkah or Chanukah: Spell it the way your audience prefers you to spell it. A Google search will give you some great explanations about different ways to spell the holiday and, more important, why.
Sparing the exclamation points: In your holiday letters, and all your writing, reduce the number of exclamation points. My father noted recently that people have gone exclamation-point happy. Not only does it take away from the times you really should be using that punctuation, but also it can be difficult to read. (A publisher once told me her press allows only six exclamation points per romantic novel.)
Second, there are a boatload of Christmas romance novels out there, so check them out. There’s mine, of course, but don’t miss this one by my college friend and more-recent critique partner Laura Nelson Selinsky: Season of Hope. There are also several by Nan Reinhardt, including her latest Christmas in River’s Edge, and Liz Flaherty, including her novella in Lights, Camera, Christmas Town, each of whom have been interviewed in this newsletter and blog.
Finally, what is a holiday blog without holiday movies? Please tell me your favorite. Here are some of mine, in no particular order:
A Charlie Brown Christmas
The Man Who Invented Christmas
It’s a Wonderful Life
A Christmas Movie Christmas
A Christmas Carol (the black-and-white one with Alistair Sims), although my hubby is a big fan of Scrooged
Hallmark romances: not all, but most!
To my friends who celebrate, Happy Hanukkah and Merry Christmas!
Forgive my typo last month in the first sentence of the newsletter. It should have been “messing up,” not “missing up.”
And please read my guest blog on Liz’s blogspace.
Sign up for my newsletter at the bottom of my home page.
Hypercorrectness
In last month’s newsletter, Liz mentioned that one of her grammar-related pet peeves was people messing up their, they’re, and there. I agree. Similarly, I get bugged when people confuse your and you’re, as well as too, to, and two.
That got me thinking about the times I myself mess up those common homophones when I’m typing quickly. I usually type you’re when I mean your because I’m being “hypercorrect,” which is a fancy grammar term that means “wrong.” 😊
Merriam-Webster.com defines “hypercorrect” as “of, relating to, or characterized by the production of a nonstandard linguistic form or construction on the basis of a false analogy (such as ‘badly’ in ‘my eyes have gone badly’).”
I love the example Webster’s gives. People who know their grammar know that “badly” is an adverb. They think that’s how their eyes are “going.” However, in this case, we really want the word “bad,” the adjective to describe the eyes.
The most common hypercorrect activity I see in students’ or even professional writers’ work is the use of the subjective pronoun when the objective pronoun is needed. Subjective pronouns are subjects of the sentence, the ones doing the action: I, you, he, she, it, we, and they. For example: He and I like cats and dogs. Objective pronouns are the ones having things come to them: me, you, him, her, it, us, and them. For example: Cats and dogs like him and me.
However, I’ve often heard speakers say, “Cats and dogs like he and I” or “She gave that to the girls and I.” Those examples are wrong. The pronouns at the end of the sentence should be the objective case: me.
Use “me” or any of the other objective pronouns either after a verb or after a preposition. For example:
That book is about her and me.
She likes Valerie and me. She likes us.
Let the people and me go to the store.*
The one preposition for which many forget the objective case is the word between. This is hypercorrect: “That is between you and I.” It should be “That is between you and me.” And we should also say this: “Between you and me, I like grammar nerds.”
*We are willing to forgive T. S. Eliot on that last one in his poem “The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock,” which starts off with “Let us go then, you and I. …” It really should be “you and me” because it’s “let us.”
So, between you and me, if you liked any of the books in the Vacation Friends Series and haven’t yet written a review, please do so on Amazon or Goodreads. It actually does help with sales. And the e-book of Midnight Clear at Christmas will free from November 25 through 27, so if potential readers see a free book, they’ll be more inclined to snatch it if Amazon or Goodreads has reviews. Even just doing the stars helps. And sign up for the newsletter on my home page.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Meet Author Liz Flaherty
I’m excited to introduce you this month to author Liz Flaherty. I haven’t read all her romance novels yet, but I’ve read enough to know I love her writing style.
Retired from the post office, Liz spends nonwriting time sewing, quilting, and wanting to travel. The author of 20-some books and her husband Duane share an old farmhouse in North Central Indiana.
Liz thinks one of the things that keeps you young when you quite obviously aren’t anymore is the constant chances you have to reinvent yourself. Her latest professional incarnation is as a fledgling women’s fiction author, and she is enjoying every minute that she’s not scared to death.
She can be reached at lizkflaherty@gmail.com, or please find her at any of the places listed in Linktree at https://linktr.ee/LizFlaherty?subscribe.
Q. When did you start writing, and what title was your first published book?
A. I started writing when I was nine, when my aunt let me practice on her Royal portable typewriter to get me out of her hair. I wrote a very dramatic story a half-page long, single-spaced, in which I made countless errors and used the word conscientiousness when I meant consciousness.
My first published book was Always Annie, a Precious Gems release from Kensington Publishing.
Q. How many books have you written? How has your writing changed along the way?
A. About 20, I think, and several novellas. I think my writing has matured, but it’s still flawed. I’ve learned—I think—to let go of the last story before starting the next one.
Q. Tell us about your Second Chances series books, which are being rereleased under the new series name of A New Season through Singing Tree Publishing. What is Singing Tree Publishing?
A. Singing Tree was meant to be Singing Trees, which is what I called the farm where my dad grew up and where my brother and sister-in-law still live. The creek was bordered with cottonwoods, and they sing as the wind rushes through them. I’m not sure how I dropped the S from Trees, but I most certainly did.
Q. You have been married to the same man for many years, so where does the second chances concept come from?
A. A few rough times in those many years, when the “same man,” who isn’t the same at all, and I, who am not the same, either, have had to fall in love again. But that’s just the start of my reasoning. I think second chances are very important to any relationship that matters.
Q. Harlequin Heartwarming just released Lights, Camera, Christmas Town, a collection of stories, one of which is yours. What was the process for working on this anthology?
A. We’ve been writing Christmas Town stories ever since Melinda Curtis, Anna J. Stewart, and Anna Adams released Christmas, Actually in—I think—2014. We’ve celebrated all kinds of things—Valentine’s Day, class reunion, bake-offs—but the Christmas stories are always my favorites.
This year, a movie’s being made of a previous Christmas Town romance, and the entire cast and crew seems to be finding love, whether they’re looking for it or not! 😊
Q. Fun question: If you had the time and skill to add another totally different occupation in your life, what would you like to do?
A. Totally different? There are two. I’d like to have a user-friendly quilt shop OR a writer-friendly coffee shop. So, since I’ve written quilt shops more than once and coffee shops … yeah … more than once, maybe not too different.
Q. Anything else you’d like to add?
A. I’m at the winding-things-down stage in my career, and it makes everything sort of bittersweet, with me thinking This may be the last time I do this … about different things. I’m always so happy to talk to other writers, though, so no matter where I’m at, thanks for inviting me to your place!
Q. What is your favorite grammar—or general writing—pet peeve?
A. How long do you have? One, which I think is fairly regional, is “I seen …” Another is the constant mix-up of their, they’re, and there. Yet another—and I’ll stop now—is the attempted hijacking of the Oxford comma.
Please comment below! We love conversation. And sign up for Roseann’s monthly newsletter on my home page.
The Apostrophe’s Other Life
Last month, we looked at the bond between possessives and apostrophes. But the possessive case and the apostrophe each work second jobs. The former goes its own way in the world of pronouns; the latter fills in for letters in contractions.
With possessive nouns, you must use the apostrophe correctly, as we discussed last month, depending on whether the noun is singular or plural. With pronouns, never use an apostrophe to indicate possession. Lots of grammar rules have exceptions or times when you can be free with the rule. Not this one: Never use an apostrophe with possessive pronouns.
That’s no problem with these pronouns: my, mine, your, her, our, and their. It gets muddier with pronouns that end in “s”: his, yours, hers, theirs, and the really tough one its.
Examples:
The desk chair is hers.
The earnings are theirs.
The dog ate its bone.
If the singular thing you are writing about owns something, it’s “its.” Period.
The it with an apostrophe, it’s, has a different meaning all together. It’s means “it is.” The word is a contraction, with the apostrophe filling in for the letter “i” in “is.” Contractions can be made up of the following words:
Pronouns + verbs: I’m, they’re, he’ll, she’s, and the dreaded you’re (not the same as the possessive “your”) and they’re (not the same as the possessive “their” or the directional “there”)
Nouns + verbs: Azalea’s going to the store. That dog’ll hunt.
Verbs + “not”: isn’t, aren’t, and won’t (which is really “will not.”)
I think this blog has exhausted its apostrophe (apostrophic?) topics. Tune in next month for another author interview. Whoo hoo!
And, friends, it’s football season. Why not pick up a copy of Wonderfully Made, whose hero plays for the Philadelphia Eagles. Get a copy for your football-fan friends, especially if they are New York Jets fans. (You know who you are!) For five days, starting September 28, the book will be free on Kindle!
One more thing: I switched up the formatting for the newsletter and blog for better reading and printing accessibility. Let me know if you like it.
Possessives, or Life with Apostrophes
None of us wants a romantic hero or heroine who is too possessive, but possessives in language are important. They show that a person, persons, a thing, or things own whatever follows. It is Gretchen’s cats or writers’ messages or the book’s meaning.
And apostrophes help tell readers about that ownership. My late Aunt Janee, who taught high school English for decades, liked to explain that apostrophes for possessives are like the word “of.” It is the cats of Gretchen, the messages of writers, or the meaning of the book.
Americans have a love-hate relationship with apostrophes. They either don’t want to use them when they should or do use them when they shouldn’t.
Here are the basics of apostrophe use: If a singular thing owns the thing after it, use apostrophe + s. If a plural thing owns the thing that follows, make the first word plural by adding an s and then add just add an apostrophe. Here are some examples:
· The kitten’s nook (one kitten with one nook)
· The kittens’ nook (more than one kitten with one nook)
Of course, it’s never that clear cut. What if your first person or thing ends in an s, such as Charles? Some style books tell you to just add the apostrophe without the s: Charles’ hat. However, for consistency, other style books do the whole apostrophe + s thing: Charles’s hat. I fall into the latter camp as I’m a glutton for consistency (and mixed metaphors!). 😊
And what happens when you have a plural word that does not end in s, such as children? Eschewing consistency (but making sense from a possessive point of view), it gets the apostrophe + s: children’s books.
Pet peeve warning (pun intended with all the kitten imagery): Do not use an apostrophe to mean a plural, and do not use an apostrophe to show ownership of a pronoun. For example, these are incorrect:
· Sunday’s are my favorite days.
· The Brooks’ (or the Brooks’s) like to travel.
· She got four A’s when she counted by 5’s.
· The dog chased it’s tail.
· That story is her’s to tell.
If your ownership noun isn’t followed by another noun, it probably isn’t possessive and probably doesn’t need an apostrophe. See that second bullet above? The members of my family are the Brookses. The house that we own is the Brookses’ house.
Of course, there are exceptions, such as “do’s and don’ts” and “yesses and no’s.” That’s when clarity trumps consistency.
Apostrophes in contractions are a different story all together. We’ll cover that another time. For now, please tell me in my blog what you think about apostrophes and possessives. And, if you’ve read and liked any of my books and haven’t yet written a review on Amazon or Goodreads, please, please, please do so. Have fun and feel free to use a possessive: “Brooks’s book does ABC.” If you’re reading this blog and haven’t signed up for my newsletter, please do so on the home page of this Web site.
Free E-Book, Plus Commas After Intro Clauses
It’s Christmas in July! From July 17 through July 21, you can get a free Kindle copy of Midnight Clear at Christmas from Amazon. If you already have it, tell your friends, but remember that the promotion does not start until Monday.
This month, in addition to discussing the e-book, let’s talk about using commas after introductory clauses. In the previous sentence, both “this month” and “in addition to discussing the e-book” are introductory clauses. The introductory clauses are introducing the main clause, which starts with “let’s talk about.” Introductory clauses are sometimes called dependent clauses because they depend on the clause that follows to be independent. An independent clause can stand on its own and has a subject, a verb, and a complete thought. For example, “When I read your book last month” is dependent on the next clause that follows it. Even though “When I read your book” has a subject and a verb, the word “when” makes it dependent on whatever may follow.
Of course, I hope that whatever follows that introductory clause is a positive review of my book, but either way, what follows should stand on its own: When I read your book, I remembered why I liked Christmas so much.
That’s enough clause-speak for the day; now, let’s get to the commas. You often need a comma after an introductory clause, but most modern style guides say that if the clause is short (less than five words), and especially if it is a prepositional phrase, you don’t have to add the comma. This is helpful in long sentences where too many commas get confusing. Here are some examples of okay places not to use commas after the introductions:
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1, NIV).
After the reading I was hungry.
Tomorrow he will join me, and if he’s willing we’ll go swimming.
In the last example, we’re already using a comma to separate the two full clauses before the “and,” so eliminating the commas after each of the introductions is allowed: “tomorrow” and “if he’s willing.”
To be honest, I tend to use commas after introductory clauses more often than not. I tutor writing at a local college, and we advise students to always use a comma after an introductory clause to avoid confusion. Here are examples where you must use the comma for clarity:
When it’s raining cats and dogs like to hide. (Add the comma after “raining” because one could first read it as “raining cats and dogs.”)
Although he is smiling like a baby he is crying. (Is he smiling like a baby or crying like a baby? A comma after “baby” would be the former meaning, and a comma after “smiling” would be the latter.)
Please comment below to let me know what you think about commas and intros.
And if you’ve read Midnight Clear and liked it, please leave an Amazon and/or Goodreads review. Or get the e-book for free July 17 through 21!
Art: ©123RF
Of Adjectives, Anniversaries, and Amphitheaters
A good teacher will advise that you limit using adjectives in creative writing: Tell your story with verbs. Don’t say, “Her footsteps were soft”; say, “She tiptoed.”
However, sometimes, you just need adjectives, especially in romance novels. How else do you know what the hero and heroine look like? What their food tastes like? What their town activities sound like? One book I read recently described the heroine’s eyes as lavender. Although I thought it was a brilliant switch from the standard blue, brown, and green—and variations thereof—I believed the writer had gone too far with that purple-related adjective. A week later, I was dining with a friend and suddenly noticed her lovely lavender eyes. Not only does that color of eye exist, but I’m glad the writer pointed it out.
When using adjectives, whether to describe that wavy, surfer-dude hair or that grapefruit-scented perfume, be sure to use hyphens, when appropriate, for clarity. Two- or three-word adjectival phrases before a noun often need hyphens. As an example, here’s an excerpt from A Midnight Clear at Christmas, when the heroine, Bailey, first meets the hero, Tanner:
Opening one eye but making no other move from her near-flat-on-her-back position in a lounge chair by the pool, Bailey tried to focus. Because the head of the man standing above her directly covered the sun, his face was hidden in shadow, but she was pretty sure she recognized the untamed, blond-brown hair fluttering in the breeze. She didn’t know him, but she had seen him around the cruise ship these past few days, chatting with the staff and the other guests.
She closed her eye. “You’re blocking the sun.”
Without the first set of hyphens, the phrase “her near flat on her back position” would have been difficult to read. Her near flat? Was that a reference to a British apartment? Was the apartment on her back position? What’s a back position? And “blond-brown” describes Tanner’s hair as a combination of the two colors. “Blond brown hair” would have made the reader ask, “Is it blond, or is it brown?”
My editing team at “my real job” likes to hyphenate compound phrases before a noun when the first word of the phrase is the adverb “more”: for example, more-efficient workers and more-expensive technology. I like that guideline. Otherwise, instead of the former meaning workers who are more efficient, “more efficient workers” (without the hyphen) might mean that you have increased the number of efficient workers.
Unlike the serial comma I covered last month, which I believe should be applied consistently, the hyphenation of “compound prenomial adjectives” is up to the writer’s discretion. For example, I do not hyphenate “high school student” because I’m pretty sure readers aren’t assuming I am talking about school students who have smoked too much weed. 😊
On another linguistic note, Hubby and I just returned from a trip-of-a-lifetime vacation (see what I did there!) to Greece to celebrate our fortieth wedding anniversary. In addition to feeding my love for Biblical history and mythology, our tour guides taught us a little linguistics lesson: Did you know that “amphi” in Greek means “around”? Thus, an amphitheater must be a complete circle. All those half-circle theaters that I’ve always called “amphitheaters” are really, well, “theaters.”
Speaking of A Midnight Clear at Christmas (see above), I plan to do a five-day free-e-book promotion for the book in July. I’ll write about it in the next blog.
Be sure comment below to let me know what you think about adjectives, hyphens, or amphitheaters! And sign up for my newsletter at the bottom of my home page.
Eye photo © 123RF Free Images
The Serial-Harvard-Oxford Comma
As many of you know, I’m a grammar nerd. I’m a lot less right brained (creative) than I’d like to be, and grammar rules excite me. My idea of a wild night on the town is to write a sentence fragment—as long as there is good reason for it.
So, as I wait for my characters in book 4 to tell me how they are going to resolve their first conflict, I figured I’d wax poetic about my favorite contentious grammar point: whether or not to use the serial comma, also called the Harvard comma or the Oxford comma. This is the comma that many style guides advise using before the conjunction (usually “and” or “but”) when you have a series of more than two items: apples, pears, and bananas; running, walking, or jogging; and singing, dancing, and acting. The last comma in each of these series is the serial comma.
Most newspapers and magazines do not use the serial comma; they write apples, pears and bananas. The original reason for that was to save space and reduce the effort—and risk of error—for typesetters. But today, a little less than half of U.S.-English writers and editors choose not to use the serial comma on principal (based on a 2014 Internet poll). Some go so far as to say it interrupts the flow of a sentence, although how one little comma can do that is beyond me.
For me, using the serial comma gives two wonderful gifts to readers: avoidance of confusion and maintenance of consistency. Obviously, in the example of “apples, pears and bananas,” readers know what I mean. But what if I write these phrases without the serial comma:
This is dedicated to my parents, Ayn Rand and God (not an original example, by the way): Is the dedication to three entities: my parents (1), Rand (2), and God (3)? Or is the dedication to my two parents, whose names are Ayn Rand and God? Of course, the argument can be made to flop the order (God, Ayn Rand and my parents), but maybe “my parents” are more important in this instance.
The vet held a party for the girls, Rover and Duke: Again, are there three groups of partiers: the girls (1), Rover (2), and Duke (3). Or did the vet’s party involve two girls named Rover and Duke?
For dinner, they like tuna, ham or peanut butter and jelly: What are the individual items? Tuna is the first, but is the second item ham or peanut butter, in which case, they like three things all at once, with the third being jelly? Or is this a choice of three items: tuna, ham, or peanut butter and jelly, the last being a combo?
I’ve heard the argument that writers should use the serial comma only when it can avoid confusion. That just hurts my consistency funny bone.
In my work-in-progress, tentatively named A New Heart, my hero and heroine use the serial comma, as does the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, from where I take my verses. Here’s a quick snippet of when Nathan and Sophia first meet (bold for the example of the serial comma):
He watched her do a quick once-over to check him out, and her originally open expression morphed into a practiced all-business look—pleasant but not especially pleased.
As he felt his brows knit, he looked down at himself. He was wearing his favorite three-piece charcoal-gray suit, a black shirt, and a fuchsia tie. It was his power suit, and he always thought he presented a fairly impressive picture in it.
Please be sure to sign up for my newsletter on my home page. And check out All for Good, Wonderfully Made, and Midnight Clear at Christmas. If you liked them already, please leave a review.
Let me know what you think? And what kind of comma do you call it?
Meet Author Nan Reinhardt
This month, I am thrilled to introduce you to a wonderful romance writer whom I’ve been following for more than ten years. Nan Reinhardt writes romantic fiction for women in their prime. As she observes, “Yeah, women still fall in love and have sex, even after they turn forty-five! Imagine!” Nan is also a freelance copyeditor and proofreader, a wife, a mom, a mother-in-law, and a grandmother. She can’t remember a time in her life when she wasn’t writing—she wrote her first romance novel at the age of ten, a love story between the most sophisticated person she knew at the time, her older sister (who was in high school and had a driver’s license!), and a member of Herman’s Hermits.
Note that there are no grammar tidbits this month because I don’t want to lose a word of Nan’s interview!
She and I talked about her new book for Tule Publishing (see the summary at the end of the newsletter), her writing process, and other fun stuff.
Q: In one sentence, how would you describe Home to River’s Edge? And when does it launch?
A: Home to River’s Edge is a story about having the rug pulled out from under what you believed was your perfect life and having to figure it out all over again. The book launches April 18, and I’m so excited!
Q: Tell us about the River’s Edge series: Where did the idea come from to set the first series, Four Irish Brothers Winery, in this town, and how has it grown into three more series?
A: Right off, I’ve always been crazy about Madison, Indiana—the little town that inspired River’s Edge. It’s so friendly and the Ohio River just teems with life and stories. So when Tule Publishing asked me if I wanted to write a brothers series for them, I immediately imagined my brothers there. Thankfully, Tule had no issue with setting a winery in southern Indiana instead of California. River’s Edge, my Flaherty brothers, and their winery were born. After the four brothers’ stories were told, readers sort of clamored for more stories from River’s Edge, so some of the secondary characters from the Flaherty brothers books came to life … and so it goes. ;-) I’ll stay in River’s Edge as long as readers and Tule want me to. I love it there!
Q: You had mentioned in your blog that you were surprised that writing about the Weaver sisters was more difficult than writing earlier books with brothers as the main characters. Why do you think that is, and what did you to do get past that?
A: I’m not sure why it was harder … maybe because I’d imagined that writing the sisters would be cake since I have sisters, but my own relationship with my sisters, although helpful, wasn’t the same as for the Weaver triplets. They had a unique bond because they shared a womb, and that was a trickier connection to create than I’d thought it would be. I read a lot about triplets and multiples and what makes their relationships different from other sibling relationships. I think finally by book 3, I figured out that it was okay for the connection between them to be a little mystical and that was an okay element to add to this series. Make sense?
Q: When was your first romance novel published, and how has your writing changed since then?
A: My first novel, Rule Number One, was published in 2012, and wow, I really hope my writing has matured and my storytelling has become tighter and more creative. I’ve learned so much as both a writer and editor in the ensuing years from simple things like point-of view (POV) switches to more involved concepts like conflict and character arcs. I learn every day and if I ever stop learning, that might mean I’m done writing.
Q: Because you have “another life” as an editor, does that affect your writing? Do you find yourself editing as you write?
A: Editor Nan and Author Nan are inextricably linked—I don’t know how to keep them from crossing paths, so I quit trying several years ago. I’m harder on myself as an editor than I am on any of the authors I work with. I do edit as I go, although the last couple of books, I’ve tried not to do that so much and just write the first draft straight through and then worry about editing. I do find that I have to read what I wrote the day before in order to get into the day’s writing, and yeah, I edit some when I do that. It’s inevitable, don’t you think?
Fun Q: If you had the time and skill to add another totally different occupation to your life, what would you like to do?
A: I wish I had the skill to sketch and do water colors so I could illustrate children’s books—sadly, I do not. I’d love to be a travel writer, but I’m not enough of a traveler to do that either. And I’ve always thought it would be fun to be a bartender in a fun bar someplace warm.
Q: Anything else you want to add?
A: I’d sure love it if folks stopped by my blog—Sundays I write the Sunday Snippet, which is usually just life stuff—what I’ve been up to, random thoughts about life and its many mysteries, sometimes book promotion, always some fun pictures from the week. Wednesdays and Thursdays, I get to highlight other authors with my Author Spotlight blogs. That’s such a treat! I’ve found so many great books that way. All that fun and frivolity is at www.nanreinhardt.com.
When Jasmine Weaver, the chief of staff to a powerful D.C. congresswoman, chose integrity, she didn’t anticipate ringing in the New Year disgraced, unemployed, and sleeping in her childhood bedroom. Now back in River’s Edge, Indiana, identical triplet Jazz has her sisters’ support while she plans her next steps. She agrees to lead the committee for their high school’s fifteenth reunion, never dreaming that her co-chair is the man who broke her teenage heart.
As the new CEO of Walker Construction, Elias Walker has taken the family business to new levels of success. He’s buried himself in work to ease the grief of losing his fiancé several years earlier and wants nothing more than to be a carpenter again. Elias grudgingly agrees to co-chair the high school’s reunion committee, but when Jazz Weaver blows into town, suddenly anything seems possible.
These high school sweethearts have lived half their lives apart. Can they reinvent themselves back in the town where it all began?
Get a Free E-Book of All for Good
You can get your own free Kindle copy of All for Good, available March 17 through March 21. If you already have a electronic copy or even a hard copy, tell a friend about it. Hey, it’s free!
All for Good is the first of the Vacation Friends Romance series, the story of friends Emily and Daniel reconnecting and exploring what life might be like if they choose to take their friendship to the next level. Plus, the setting is the Pocono mountains, so there’s that.
Things are fairly quiet in my world these days as I continue writing book 4, Nathan’s story. He and Sophia are at a turning point in their relationship. I’m not worried that they they won’t get together; I just want to make sure that they know what the stakes are.
I’m very excited about next month’s newsletter. One of my romance-writer idols, Nan Reinhardt, is going to join me in an interview, and we’ll talk about the book she has launching right around the time the April newsletter goes out. Like me, Nan’s an editor in her “other life,” and I’ve somewhat modeled my romance writing experience after her journey.
If you’re not on the newsletter mailing list, please sign up now at the top of this page or on the home page.
Sentence skills snippet: I love words, so because there is an apostrophe in “St. Patrick’s Day,” I’m sharing this apostrophe joke:
Q: Why should you never date an apostrophe?
A: They’re too possessive.
Happy St. Patrick’s Day (with an apostrophe!).
Happy Day-After Valentine’s Day
This is the season of love, and what better way to celebrate it than to read a romance novel. Okay, there are other ways, but you see where I’m headed.
When I was doing a radio interview after the launch of Midnight Clear at Christmas, the DJ asked if I wrote romance novels because my husband was particularly romantic. After a pause, I was inspired to quip, “I write romance both because of my husband and in spite of him!” 😉
Life isn’t always a fairy tale, but we can thank God that we are blessed with people who love us now and have loved us in the past, as well as people we have had the privilege to love.
I continue to write Nathan and Sophia’s romance, the next book in the Vacation Friends Romance series, and I’ve included a little snippet below. If you have read any or all three of the previous books in the series, and if you liked the story and haven’t yet posted a review, please do so on Amazon or Goodreads or both. It helps other readers and looks good when I’m doing marketing. Even just doing stars ratings helps.
So, continue to love and to read about love. I believe doing those things helps us be kinder—and more loving.
If your’re not subscribed to the newsletter, please do. Until next month …
From book 4:
Sophia glanced toward the locker-room door again.
On cue, the door slowly opened, and Nathan entered the gym area. His shorts were not brand name. In fact, they had no name: just generic, baggy black gym shorts beneath a rather ugly lime-green T-shirt. Maybe he wasn’t as pretentious as she thought he was. She narrowed her eyes to focus on the writing on his shirt. It simply said, “Love one another.” Under that was “John 13:34.”
Oh, great. He was some righteous holy roller who thought he knew what God wanted for the world. Yeah, she had him pegged right to begin with. Of course, there was a slim possibility that he was simply a nice Christian guy. She shook her head. Nah.
And too bad. He was handsome. His neck was bent as he concentrated on untangling his earphones. Although his hair was relatively short, he had evidently spent good money on the cut, and the front was thick. So, with his head down, his dark bangs, which had been styled back off his face, tumbled down over his forehead. He seemed younger and a little more vulnerable than before.
Suddenly, he looked up and caught her eye—“caught” being the operative word because she had been gawking. But instead of gloating, his honey-brown cheeks turned pink, and he bit his lower lip and hiked his shoulders. Then he held out his tangled earphones and stepped toward the desk where she sat. She stood again.
“There has to be a better way to store these things in my gym bag,” he said.
She couldn’t help but smile. “Uh, there is, you know. Chuck them and buy wireless earbuds.”
“Ha. Ha. I’ll have you know I use wireless headphones every day in my job. But I like these wired ones for working out. I can easily plug them into your very state- of-the-art bikes or treadmills or EFX machines and choose whatever channel I’d like to watch on the mounted TVs.” He leaned toward her, conspiratorially. “Pete told me all that.” Then he straightened and cleared his throat. “The thing is, I use wireless at work. Tangled wires are for play. You must know we rich lawyers don’t like to mix work and play.”
She recognized that he was babbling, and it was cute. She tried to scowl at his long-windedness, but she was pretty sure the result made her look slightly demented. “I thought you were a paralegal.”
He gave one quick nod and then put an earpiece in one ear, despite the still tangled mess below. As he turned to head toward the EFX machines, he shot back, “Aha. So, you were paying attention.”
He was already halfway to the back of the gym before she mumbled, “Well played.”
Marketing: The Bane of a Writer’s Existence
I give credit to author Michael Barrington for the idea of marketing with your clothes, as per the photo to the right. After his wife gave him a shirt similar to the one I’m sporting, he wrote about the attention it gets. I immediately bought one for myself.
We writers would rather write than market, but marketing is like proofreading: It must be done!
Thus, I’ve decided to start sending an e-mail newsletter monthly, instead of a quarterly, hoping it’s not too onerous for readers. If you haven’t signed up yet, please do so on my home page. My goal is to make them short but interesting, including sprinkling interviews with other writers so that you don’t get tired of my voice.
I hope you all got to enjoy Midnight Clear at Christmas. Although each book in the series is “my favorite,” this one was special to me—maybe simply because I love Christmas.
I’m working on book 4 now, Nathan’s romance, and I admit it’s slow-going. Nathan has such a kind heart, and I want to be true to his story. His heroine, Sophia, is strong, sassy, and independent in a way I aspire to be someday. I’ll promise to keep at it if you promise to keep reading!
Free E-Book Until Dec. 12: Wonderfully Made
Get the e-book version of Wonderfully Made free until Monday, December 12. And be sure to check out Midnight Clear at Christmas as well.
Get the e-book version of Wonderfully Made at no cost until Monday, December 12. If you’ve already read it and liked it, please review it on Amazon and Goodreads. And don’t forget to check out Midnight Clear at Christmas.
Check Out West Chester, PA, Authors
Just a reminder to visit the Helen Kate Furness Free Library this Saturday to meet some authors and enjoy some snacks. If you're in the West Chester, PA, area, stop by!
Local Author Event
I'll be one of the authors at a local author event at Helen Kate Furness Free Library on September 10. If you're in the West Chester, PA, area, stop by!
Free E-Book Promotion: 5 Days
Amazon is offering the Kindle version of Wonderfully Made for free from June 24 through June 28. If you haven’t read it yet, then get it free now. If you have read it or plan to, and you like it, please leave a review on Amazon and/or Goodreads. It all helps!
Wonderfully Made is book 2 in the Vacation Friends Romance series. In my next quarterly newsletter, I plan to announce book 3 in this series, a Christmas novella tentatively titled Midnight Clear at Christmas.
Below is a snippet from the “meet cute” of Wonderfully Made. While running on the beach, Abby has run into Cayden and knocked him over. After he gets up, unscathed and maybe a little smitten, he wants to keep the conversation going:
“So who gets you stoked to run?” Cayden asked, lifting his chin to point at her hand on her headphones. “I’m a sixties rock freak, I’m ashamed to admit. They have the right beats for a reasonably steady run.”
Abby looked back at him and then looked down toward the hand that was still resting on her headphones. “Oh, this is Carmen.”
“I don’t know them.”
Abby laughed. It was a robust but high and sweet laugh.
“This is Carmen, the opera.” She wasn’t talking down to him, and she actually looked more embarrassed that she was listening to opera than concerned that he didn’t know what she meant. “Don’t get me wrong; I let my students perform sixties songs for concerts. But this is what geeky music teachers listen to for fun.”