Editor's Corner

One of the blogs I subscribe to, The Grammarist, sends me tidbits about frequently confused words. Sometimes they come up with brilliant comparisons or insights; other times I wonder if they were goofing around when they come up with things like “chips vs. fries,” “prostate vs. prostrate,” or “nib vs. nub.” Today’s article is one of those that made me laugh. Yes, the words (misology and mixology) sound similar, but do people really mix up “hatred of reason” with “mixing cocktails”? Well, you be the judge.

Misology and mixology are two words that are very close in pronunciation and spelling, but have different meanings.

Misology is a hatred of reason, a hatred of debate or a hatred of being free of ignorance. A misologist is one who hates reason or debate. The word misology is derived from the Greek word misologia, meaning hatred of words. The idea of misology is found in Plato’s Phaedo, which recalls the last hours of Socrates’ life and his suicide.

Mixology is the practice of mixing cocktails and other alcoholic drinks. One who performs mixology is a mixologist. The term mixologist to mean a bartender first appeared in the mid-1800s, though the term mixology first appeared in the mid-1900s, as a backformation of mixologist.

Shaken, not stirred.

Enjoy your weekend!

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

Happy belated Valentine’s Day. I am working remotely and didn’t get to spend the day with my sweetheart, but we’ve never been very into this holiday, anyway. Call me jaded, but this romantic holiday feels overly commercialized. Maybe my days working as a florist killed all the romance of this day.

So, as a means of sharing my humbug attitude about Valentines’ Day, I thought I’d offer you twelve really awful Valentine’s Day puns from Dictionary.com. (Click the link to see cute images that go along with the puns.)

1. Olive you!
2. We’re butter together. You’re my butter half.
3. You’re my significant otter. I’m otterly in love with you.
4. You’ve gotta pizza my heart
5. I knead you! I loaf you!
6. I love you more than I can bear. Life without you would be grizzly.
7. Will you bee mine? We bee-long together, honey!
8. I lava you very much. It was lava first sight.
9. I love you watts. You turn me on.
10. I find you ribbiting. I’m toad-ally into you.
11. I’m really fondue you. You’re so grate.
12. You’re fern-tastic. Don’t ever leaf me.

I know they’re horrible! That’s the point of puns. I hope your day is a good one.

Donna Bradley Burcher | Senior Technical Editor | Symitar®

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.278.0432 | Extension: 765432

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

Happy Valentine’s Day! I was looking for a topic today and rather than shooting each other with arrows of love or delivering chocolate hearts, I decided it would be more appropriate to share some heart-related etymologies with you. I thought of one of my Greek aunts calling me “cardoula-mou” (καρδούλα-μου), which is basically “sweetheart,” and I thought I’d take it from there.

heart: Old English heorte “heart (hollow muscular organ that circulates blood); breast, soul, spirit, will, desire; courage; mind, intellect,” from Proto-Germainic *herton- (source also of Old Saxon herta, Old Frisian herte, Old Norse hjarta, Dutch hart, Old High German herza, German Herz, Gothic hairto).

cardiac: “of or pertaining to the heart,” c. 1600, from French cardiaque (14c.) or directly from Latin cardiacus, from Greek kardiakos “pertaining to the heart,” from kardia “heart.”

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

Good day, fine people!

After Friday’s email fiasco, I know a lot of people here were upset with me. Today, I have some humorous epitaphs (phrases or statements written in memory of a person who has died, especially as an inscription on a tombstone) for you, from a Richard Lederer article. I don’t think anyone was mad enough to put me six feet under, but if you were, I’d hope you’d come up with something like these for my last words.

Although you may find the humor a bit grave and the plots too deep, I am pleased to unveil some of the English-speaking world’s funniest epitaphs.

Let’s start our expedition with epitaphs that demonstrate how some folk take their jobs with them to the grave.

Epitaph on a dentist:

Stranger: Approach this spot with gravity.
John Brown is filling his last cavity.

Epitaph on a lawyer:

Goembel, John E.
“The defense rests.”

Epitaph on an auctioneer:

Born 1828
Going!
Going!!
Gone!!!
1876

My favorite in this category is an epitaph on a waiter:

By and by,
God caught his eye.

Some epitaphs show that punning can be a grave experience.

Epitaph on a drunkard:

He had his beer
From year to year,
And then his bier had him.

About a woman who died from consumption:

It was a cough that carried her off.
It was a coffin they carried her off in.

On the stone of a church organist named Meredith:

Here lies one blown out of life
Who lived a merry life,
And died a merry death.

In an English burial ground:

Here under the sod and under the trees
Is buried the body of Solomon Pease.
But in this hole lies only his pod.
His soul is shelled out and gone to God.

In an Irish burial ground:

Here lies Bridget O’Callaghan
Postmistress and Spinster
Returned – Unopened

Epitaph on an atheist:

All dressed up and no place to go.

On the gravestone of one Owen Moore:

Gone away, owin’ more than he could pay.

On the headstone of Anglo-French writer Hilaire Belloc:

When I am dead, I hope it may be said:
“His sins were scarlet, but his books were read.”

Epitaph written by American author Dorothy Parker:

Excuse my dust.

Boot hill cemeteries throughout the American West are dotted with wry messages on their tombstones:

Here lies Lester Moore:
Four slugs from a forty-four.
No Les. No More.

Here lays Butch.
We planted him raw.
He was quick on the trigger,
But slow on the draw.

Here lies a man named Zeke,
Second-fastest draw in Cripple Creek.

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

On Friday, an email intended for the administrator of the Editor’s Corner mailing list was erroneously sent to the entire mailing list. I apologize for any confusion this caused and for any unwanted emails you received. Thank you for your patience.

*************************************

Good morning!

This is sort of a backwards way of doing things, but why not? Today’s Editor’s Corner started with some photos that one of you sent me. I’ve been patiently waiting for an opportunity to use them, but nothing has arisen. I thought maybe I could give them to the folks who keep warning us about the flu, since they’re health-related. But no! These are mine!

I decided to invent an opportunity. Heath-related? Flu season? That got me thinking. I remember in French class learning the word “grippe” meant “the flu.” It sounded so much more serious back then, probably because they always accompanied mentions of la grippe with pictures of the plague and Paris sewers. I seem to recall reading about someone screaming, “La grippe! La grippe!” and then dying. Of course, that was probably me just being dramatic and then falling asleep in second period French class.

Anyway, here’s what I found. Somewhere in the United States, somebody has been using the term grippe to mean flu since 1776! From Merriam-Webster:

noun: grippe
old-fashioned term for influenza.

French, literally, seizure, probably from gripper to seize.

And our “flu”:

noun: influenza

a highly contagious viral infection of the respiratory passages causing fever, severe aching, and catarrh, and often occurring in epidemics.

Mid-18th century: from Italian, literally ‘influence,’ from medieval Latin influentia (see influence). The Italian word also has the sense ‘an outbreak of an epidemic,’ hence ‘epidemic.’ It was applied specifically to an influenza epidemic that began in Italy in 1743, later adopted in English as the name of the disease.

So there you have it! And now, the photos. Stay safe, America!

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

Symitar Documentation Services

The other day, after my Editor’s Corner Everyday vs Every Day, someone asked me about the words goodnight vs good night. At Symitar, we also have a third option: GOODNIGHT. As you might guess, this is the name of a job file that runs in the evening after business hours.

Today, we’ll concentrate on the first two options.

goodnight: Goodnight (as a single word) is considered an interjection. When someone is leaving for the evening, or heading off to bed, you might say “Goodnight, Lucy. Don’t let the bed bugs bite.” Or you might actually use their real name. That might go over better!

good night: In this case, good is an adjective and night is a noun. Used together, they mean the same as goodnight: something said as a farewell gesture to someone who is leaving or someone who is hitting the hay. You could also be describing the night itself. For example:

• “Good night,” said Captain Von Trapp to all of his little ones, before he tucked them into bed.
• This is a good night to go fishing! The moon is full, the water is calm, and they just stocked the lake!

Just remember, you would not use the single word to describe the night itself; it is simply a farewell for the evening.

Incorrect: I’m wearing my lucky socks. It’s a goodnight to play poker!

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

619-542-6773 | Ext: 766773

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

As a writing instructor, one of the fundamental writing problems I dealt with was choppy sentences, which are sentences that don’t create a logical flow. In the writer’s mind, these sentences may be linked, but the writer has failed to connect the dots to help the reader follow along.

Here’s an example of a paragraph with choppy, seemingly unrelated sentences:

Studies show that people remember lectures better when they’ve taken handwritten notes, rather than typed ones. Adolescents these days use electronic devices like phones, tablets, or laptops. The educational system must respond to new technologies. Perhaps it is time to bring back the pencil.

The first sentence is about a study that claims people remember more when they hand write their notes. The second sentence discusses adolescents’ use of electronic devices. The third sentence moves on to the educational system. And the last sentence loops back around to the idea of handwriting by mentioning the pencil.

If we stretch, we can make a connection between these sentences (believe me, it’s not always easy!), but the reader should not have to strain to figure out the intended message. It’s the writer’s job to move us seamlessly from the introduction of an idea to its logical conclusion. How do writers do that? They use transitional words and phrases to link their sentences, and they include all necessary information. To create a smoother flow of ideas, I’ve added transitions and included information (that was previously only implied) to the two middle sentences of the previous choppy paragraph.

Studies show that people remember lectures better when they’ve taken handwritten notes, rather than typed ones. However, adolescents these days don’t do much handwriting; instead, they do most of their writing on electronic devices like phones, tablets, or laptops. While it is true that the educational system must respond to new technologies, sometimes old tools are better. Perhaps it is time to bring back the pencil.

The trick is to look at your own writing from the reader’s perspective. Once you do that, you can fill in the blanks by using transitions to create a flow of ideas.

Donna Bradley Burcher | Senior Technical Editor | Symitar®

8985 Balboa Ave. | San Diego, CA 92123 | Ph. 619.278.0432 | Ext: 765432

Here are some excerpts from this month’s Chicago Manual of Style Q&A. I hope you learn something and get a laugh, as I did.

Q. Hello, Chicago. I am slightly confused about what the difference between “compare with” and “compare to” is. Paragraph 5.195 seems to suggest that it’s a matter of whether one is making a “literal comparison” or a “poetic or metaphorical comparison,” whereas 5.250 says it’s a matter of whether one is identifying “both similarities and differences” or “primarily similarities.” What’s the rundown?

A. The two paragraphs of CMOS use different ways to describe the same thing. Strictly speaking, to “compare with” is to investigate the similarities and differences between things, such as when you make an actual (literal) comparison between wine and apples, perhaps noting that they both are fruity (similarities), but that one is liquid and one solid (differences). To “compare to” is to note that one thing is like another, but not necessarily literally. Saying that the flavor of a wine is like apples or someone’s cheeks are like roses (similarities) involves more metaphorical or poetic comparisons. Of course, actual usage of those prepositions does not always distinguish so finely.

Q. When writing a novel, if you label someone in a quote (e.g.) “You Mad Little Bugger,” is it capitalized?

A. Oh my goodness no. That would look as though the speaker were giving the person an award or an official title. Stick with lowercase.

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

619-542-6773 | Ext: 766773

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

Here’s something I don’t get too many questions about, but I see it misused often. When should you use everyday and when should you use every day? Hopefully this will clear things up and make it easier for you.

The word everyday is an adjective used to describe a noun. For example, “My brother wears his everyday clothes to work, but he wears his kilt to special occasions.” Some synonyms for everyday are “mundane,” “ordinary,” and “commonplace.”

Every day, as two separate words, is usually an adverbial phrase used to modify a verb. For example, “Every day, I spend at least 45 minutes walking my dogs.” When you are writing and you think you need to use two words, see if you can replace “every day” with “each day.” If you can use “each day” instead, then “every day” is what you are looking for.

Here are some additional examples:

• When I talk, I use everyday speech; when I write, I try to improve my grammar and follow the formal rules more closely.
• Bob feeds the birds every day. It’s part of his everyday routine.
• Every day, I get up, meditate, and fall asleep cross-legged with my back to the wall.

Kara Church

Technical Editor, Advisory

619-542-6773 | Ext: 766773

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.

On Friday, I discussed three 2008 word-of-the-year nominees that never quite caught on. Here are three more nominees that are still being used 10 years later.

Hypermiling

When Oxford Dictionaries chose hypermiling as their 2008 word of the year, the average price for a gallon of gas was $3.26, and drivers were obsessed with getting better mileage.

• hypermiling: the use of fuel-saving techniques (such as lower speeds and frequent coasting) to maximize a vehicle’s fuel mileage

In 2017, gas was down to $2.41 a gallon, but the word hypermiling stuck around. There are still internet forums related to hypermiling, and the word appeared in several news stories throughout the year.

Staycation

In addition to hypermiling, another way frugalistas saved money in 2008 was by vacationing close to home.

• staycation: a vacation that is spent at home or close to home

I don’t think I’ve ever heard the word staycation in normal conversation, but local news stations use it often—not just in San Diego, but also in Buffalo, NY; Chicago, IL; Davenport, IA; Fredericksburg, VA; and Fresno, CA, to name a few.

Tweet

Of the 2008 word-of-the-year nominees, tweet is undoubtedly the most successful. Interestingly, Oxford Dictionaries didn’t even choose it as a finalist in 2008.

• tweet: a post made on the Twitter online message service

Twitter went from six million users in 2008 to 328 million users in 2017, and President Trump’s prolific posting keeps tweet in the headlines almost every day.

Ben Ritter | Technical Editor | Symitar®
8985 Balboa Avenue | San Diego, CA 92123
619-682-3391 | or ext. 763391 | www.Symitar.com

Symitar Documentation Services

NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are intended
exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The message,
together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or distribution
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please
immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies.