IWSG July 2015

Click here to find out more and to see a list of other IWSG blogs.

Purpose: To share and encourage. Writers can express doubts and concerns without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds!

It feels like I've been gone forever!

FIRST, Authors Against Child Slavery campaign: 
This is where authors donated books to people donating to Operation Underground Railroad--we achieved our goal--with two days to spare. Well, with two days to spare, we met our goal! Thank you for everyone who contributed, whether by donating books, money, or helping to spread the word.

SECOND, Vacation
I'd like to say that my vacation to Hawaii to visit my daughter and the kids was a dream. Let's just say that the trip involved:
* a burning smell inside the plane on take off that which delayed our arrival
* calls from work that had me scrambling and turned the second half of my vacation into a working vacation
* charming grandkids who I just love being around
* MineCraft - yes, they taught me how to play

 THIRD but not last -- IWSG ... and grammar
Somehow, it seems fitting that after a long blogging break I should return on IWSG day. It will force me to keep it brief.

A grammar lesson from Game of Thrones:

How has your summer been going so far?
Have you taken your vacation yet or are you still making plans?

Grammar - What the Heck is Past Perfect?

The rules of grammar can be hard to understand. English grammar especially. But, believe it or not, there is a reason for most of them.

I've noticed a writing trend that bugs me. Bugs me a lot. It's when the author is writing in past tense (you know, the story is being told in the past) and fails to use the past perfect tense when referring to events that happened before the current scene in the story.

Past perfect?  What is that?

In English grammar, "perfect" means past. Don't ask me why. That's just the way it is. So, past perfect means past past. And, believe it or not, it's important for clarification. I hate when I'm reading a book and the author jumps into a scene from an earlier time but fails to inform the reader of the time change by shifting tense.

Here are some examples of past tense:

"The captain’s limp body slid to the deck." (past tense)

"He opened his eyes and saw her watching him." (past tense) 

"He pushed the muzzle against the man's throat." (past tense)

But what if you need to tell about something that happened earlier, perhaps even before the book began? If you just remain in past tense style above, the reader won't realize you've shifted.

"The captain’s limp body had slid to the deck." (past perfect)

 "He'd opened his eyes and had seen her watching him." (past perfect)

"He'd pushed the muzzle against the man's throat." (past perfect)

We do this automatically when we speak to each other. Imagine being interviewed by the police about a break in at your next door neighbor's house.

The cop leaned in. "Your fingerprints are on the frame of the window the burglar entered through. Why were you in the house?"

If you'd been there earlier in the week for a game night, you wouldn't say: "Yeah. I went over there." You'd clarify: "Yeah, I'd gone over to play cards on Tuesday."

With your desire not to be considered a suspect in the break in, you'd make darn sure the officer knew that your visit to the house had happened before the burglary.

So, why are so many writers not using past perfect tense if it's so important for clarification? I've heard this can be explained because so many unedited books are being self-published. That might be some of it, but I've recently read some traditionally published books that were almost devoid of the past perfect tense. And whenever the story jumped to a past past event, it was confusing. And distracting.

So. Word of advice. Understand the past perfect tense. There's lots online to help you. Like here.

Use the past perfect tense. It can be your friend.

Grammar Wednesday - Lay and Lie

I know. Now that A to Z is finished I had promised to get back to my personality series. However things have been nuts AND I'm going to the Storymakers conference this week--Publication Primer is tomorrow!

Instead I decided to share a little tidbit I found from some work grammar notes. There are some grammar rules I latch on to and don't forget. There are others that I can't get to stick to save my life. The proper usage for Lay and Lie fits into the latter category. I usually let Word's grammar checker tell me which to use.

I know. Scary, right? Your professional creditably left to Word?

*shivers* 

I hope this helps you--and forces this dang rule to stick in my brain.


LAY
A transitive verb (meaning it is always followed by a noun or a pronoun that receives the action of the verb).

It means to put or place.

Forms: lay, laying, laid, (have) laid

LIE
An intransitive verb that does not have an object.

It means to incline.

Forms: lie, lying, lay, (have) lain

Did you spot that? Lay appears as a form for both words! No wonder so many of us are confused! It's a conspiracy, I tell ya!

And look what's coming out this weekend. 

Anybody planning to go to the opening?

Hubby and I'll have to go next Monday.

A to Z - There, Their, and They're

I've been seeing these done incorrectly a LOT lately, so here's a reminder.

There ... Their ... They're

There . . . . . . . in or at that place

Their . . . . . . .  possessive form of they

They're . . . contraction of "they are"

Posting Somewhere Else Today

I'm posting over at the Authors Incognito Blog today if you wanted to drop over. I'll be over there every Sunday.

I love Jon Schmidt and The Piano Guys.

Enjoy.

Grammar Thursday and Life, the Universe and Everything

Ever get confused about which to use--who or whom? It's not as complicated as you might think. Ask yourself a simple question:

Who is doing what to whom?

The one doing the action is the subject: who.  The one being acted upon is the object: whom. 

This is where I am for three days. I'll chat about it in future posts. 

In the meantime, have a great weekend!

Gramma Friday ... and Encouragement

There ... Their ... They're

There . . . . . . . in or at that place

Their . . . . . . .  possessive form of they

They’re . . . . . .contraction of they are

I'd like to thank Mooderino for tweeting this bit of inspiration.

Ira Glass on Storytelling from David Shiyang Liu on Vimeo.

Grammar Friday - Gender Specific Language

 The American Heritage Book of English Usage says :

As a general rule, it is good to remember that you should only refer to a person by category when it is relevant or necessary to the discussion at hand. That is, you should ordinarily view people as individuals and not mention their racial, ethnic, or other status, unless it is important to your larger purpose in communicating.

There are simple ways to replace gender specific language with gender neutral language (many of these are becoming widely used):

• chairman … chair
• manned … staffed
• fireman … firefighter
• policeman … police officer
• stewardess … flight attendant
• mailman … mail carrier

 Perhaps one of the biggest issues for writers is clarity. Since gender specific language might jar some readers out of the reading flow, we want to be careful.

Some ways that people try to get around it is to use words like they or their to replace he or she. Anybody see the potential grammar problem?

It's when the writer doesn't continue the change to make everything match.

For example, this is gender specific:

If a patient is late in arriving, he must pay a late fee.

Try using one of these gender neutral sentences instead:

Any patient who is late in enrolling must pay an additional fee.

Patients who are late in arriving must pay an additional fee.

If a patient is late in arriving, he or she must pay an additional fee.

NOT

If a patient is late in arriving, they must pay an additional fee.

The problem with the last one is patient is singular but they is plural. The writer didn't continue the change to make everything match. It's like adorable Dobby's disharmonized socks.

Oops!

It's easy to fix by changing patient to patients.

There are some obvious areas where writers shouldn't be guided by this modern trend. The language in historical fiction should represent the culture at the time the book is set.

SciFi and Fantasy writers can pretty much do anything they want, since they're world building anyway. Right? I love it when SciFi or Fantasy authors cleverly create words, expletives, etc. that are a reflection of their world/culture.

Can you think of any other genres that can ignore this particular grammar rule? Do you have ways that you're politically correct when you write to avoid "jarring" your readers?