gtomaras wrote:I would like to nominate this thread as one of the funniest of the year.

Additionally, I feel that the colon is the most underutilized punctuation: the proper use of the colon is especially relevant or those who love food.

Yeah, I started to tool around on that Nat Grammar Day site linked above until I read this:
"What do you serve at good-grammar potlucks? High-fiber foods, of course. They're good for the colon."


MikeW665 -
Now that's a good one.

Saffron, Shrimp and Crab Risotto
Black Tiger Shrimp, Jumbo Lump Meat cooked with Saffron infused Arborio Rice, Rendered Sopresata Grana Cheese, and topped with Lobster Roe Salt.

As long as we're getting deeply into this--

Actually, this is not strictly an issue of the serial comma in the description as it's currently phrased, since we are not dealing with parallel elements. (The title -- Saffron, Shrimp and Crab Risotto -- is ok, if you're using AP style).

Cf the following rephrasing which properly sets up a series of parallel elements and clarifies the description:

Black Tiger Shrimp and Jumbo Lump Meat, cooked with Saffron infused Arborio Rice, with Rendered Sopresata Grana Cheese, and topped with Lobster Roe Salt.

very nice job jbw!

JBW - that puts the issue back to square one, no?
We have Rendered Sopressata and Grana Cheese which are two diferent ingredients in this dish, no?
According to your description, again, we have one kind of cheese: Rendered Sopressata Grana.


Not pointed at JBW at all - just writing this in general. A note to menu writers who make themselves look like idiots for NO REASON:
I tend to not try to fancy things up because that's just how I roll. I cannot stand pretentiousness for the sake of trying to look good. It REEKS of idiocy if you ask me. Do what you KNOW, and do it BETTER than anyone else. When you learn how to do something new, practice makes perfect. When you get it perfect, THEN use it in the real world. Don't write a menu, and try to make it fancy if you don't KNOW what you are doing. It makes you look even MORE stupid than you need to appear. I'll be the FIRST person to admit that I'm a moron, HOWEVER, I wouldn't go around advertising it:

Saffron infused arborio rice with jumbo lump crab meat, black tiger shrimp, rendered sopressata, and grana cheese. This is topped with lobster roe salt.

According to your description, again, we have one kind of cheese: Rendered Sopressata Grana.

seebee,

You're exactly right, and that's exactly how I read it, which again goes to show why accurate punctuation is important. (No wonder the OP didn't notice pork in the item, because I wouldn't have, either).

seebee wrote:JBW - that puts the issue back to square one, no?
We have Rendered Sopressata and Grana Cheese which are two diferent ingredients in this dish, no?
According to your description, again, we have one kind of cheese: Rendered Sopressata Grana.


Not pointed at JBW at all - just writing this in general. A note to menu writers who make themselves look like idiots for NO REASON:
I tend to not try to fancy things up because that's just how I roll. I cannot stand pretentiousness for the sake of trying to look good. It REEKS of idiocy if you ask me. Do what you KNOW, and do it BETTER than anyone else. When you learn how to do something new, practice makes perfect. When you get it perfect, THEN use it in the real world. Don't write a menu, and try to make it fancy if you don't KNOW what you are doing. It makes you look even MORE stupid than you need to appear. I'll be the FIRST person to admit that I'm a moron, HOWEVER, I wouldn't go around advertising it:

Saffron infused arborio rice with jumbo lump crab meat, black tiger shrimp, rendered sopressata, and grana cheese. This is topped with lobster roe salt.

I wouldn't touch that travesty of a dish with a ten foot pole. Your punctuation, however, is perfection.

I would try to avoid even looking at the description
For me, it's the cheese. One of these things is not like the other....

It just doesn't belong.

gtomaras wrote:I would like to nominate this thread as one of the funniest of the year.

Additionally, I feel that the colon is the most underutilized punctuation: the proper use of the colon is especially relevant or those who love food.

Of course, gtomaras, some would argue that your sentence endorsing the colon should actually contain a semicolon. The argument would center around whether your sentence contained two related ideas each self-contained within an independent clause, or if the second half of your sentence could more accurately be described as an explanation of the first half of the sentence.

I'm an editor, in case you couldn't guess from my username. Here's the thing about the serial comma: Use it or don't use, but please just be consistent within a document.

chgoeditor wrote:

gtomaras wrote:I would like to nominate this thread as one of the funniest of the year.

Additionally, I feel that the colon is the most underutilized punctuation: the proper use of the colon is especially relevant or those who love food.

Of course, gtomaras, some would argue that your sentence endorsing the colon should actually contain a semicolon. The argument would center around whether your sentence contained two related ideas each self-contained within an independent clause, or if the second half of your sentence could more accurately be described as an explanation of the first half of the sentence.

I'm an editor, in case you couldn't guess from my username. Here's the thing about the serial comma: Use it or don't use, but please just be consistent within a document.

I knew this argument would be made. I felt that taking the time to come up with something indisputable would probably get me in trouble at work; people at construction sites generally don't appreciate the finer points of punctuation.

seebee wrote:MikeW665 -
Now that's a good one.

Thanks.......I like it.

chgoeditor wrote:I'm an editor, in case you couldn't guess from my username. Here's the thing about the serial comma: Use it or don't use, but please just be consistent within a document.

So considering that you’re an editor, do you let the people that you edit start sentences with a conjunction?

MikeW665 wrote:

chgoeditor wrote:I'm an editor, in case you couldn't guess from my username. Here's the thing about the serial comma: Use it or don't use, but please just be consistent within a document.

So considering that you’re an editor, do you let the people that you edit start sentences with a conjunction?

I'll often allow it, and I'll do it myself! Here's the key to understanding the work of editors: Our job is to facilitate the readability and clarity of writing. Think of an editor as a coach. We'll help the writer get their message across and we'll help correct technical flaws, but a good editor will do that without significantly altering the writer's voice.

The example that led off this discussion is a great example of how an editor can help clarify a sentence. Although most punctuation rules are unambiguous, some (such as the serial comma) are subjective. Grammar, in contrast to punctuation, has many more shades of gray. Sure, our high-school English teachers would have you believe that everything is black and white when it comes to grammar. That's just not the case. Writing is an art, and, the best art does not always follow hard-and-fast rules. If you were to undertake a thorough examination of the acknowledged "best" English literature, I'd bet that it breaks a lot of rules while still managing to clearly, eloquently convey its point, paint a picture, engage the reader and tell a story. Can you imagine if an English teacher--posing as an editor--were to "edit" Shakespeare or TS Eliot or Hemingway so that their works followed the rules? It would be horrible, and their writing would lose everything that makes it special and unique.

gtomaras wrote:I knew this argument would be made. I felt that taking the time to come up with something indisputable would probably get me in trouble at work; people at construction sites generally don't appreciate the finer points of punctuation.

LOL. Actually, given the nature of the discussion, I think it's impressive that you came up with an example that could arguably work with either a semicolon or a colon!

chgoeditor wrote:I'll often allow it, and I'll do it myself! Here's the key to understanding the work of editors: Our job is to facilitate the readability and clarity of writing. Think of an editor as a coach. We'll help the writer get their message across and we'll help correct technical flaws, but a good editor will do that without significantly altering the writer's voice.

The example that led off this discussion is a great example of how an editor can help clarify a sentence. Although most punctuation rules are unambiguous, some (such as the serial comma) are subjective. Grammar, in contrast to punctuation, has many more shades of gray. Sure, our high-school English teachers would have you believe that everything is black and white when it comes to grammar. That's just not the case. Writing is an art, and, the best art does not always follow hard-and-fast rules. If you were to undertake a thorough examination of the acknowledged "best" English literature, I'd bet that it breaks a lot of rules while still managing to clearly, eloquently convey its point, paint a picture, engage the reader and tell a story. Can you imagine if an English teacher--posing as an editor--were to "edit" Shakespeare or TS Eliot or Hemingway so that their works followed the rules? It would be horrible, and their writing would lose everything that makes it special and unique.

Not to be harsh, but I would not consider newspapers, magazines, TV/radio commercials, and the like to be art, a craft maybe, but not art. Along the same lines, how can I appreciate art if the technique is flawed? Would it be possible to listen to a piece of music from Bach or Beethoven (or any music of your choice) if the orchestra was out of tune? Would a picture by Ansel Adams be any good if he hadn’t bothered to focus the camera? Would you serve a meal without tasting it first?
There is an old saying: Anything worth doing, is worth doing right. It is hard for me to take an author seriously if they can’t get the basics right. I’m sure any writer worth their salt, could get their point across while following the rules.

MikeW665 wrote:Not to be harsh, but I would not consider newspapers, magazines, TV/radio commercials, and the like to be art, a craft maybe, but not art.

Some of it is more of a craft than an art, but if you believe that none of it is an art, I'd suggest you're reading the wrong periodicals. Eloquent, persuasive, clever and engaging writing can be found on the pages of many publications.

I quickly searched for, but was unable to find, an email I read within the last year from a British food critic to his editors. The food critic was outraged because the editors butchered his work without consulting him, and, in the process, managed to wreck a funny joke that the writer had built up throughout the column. I think you would have enjoyed reading it, because the original column did show grace and wit and artistry. (Although I agreed that the edited version was butchered, I still saw ways that the original could have been subtly improved.) Maybe another poster who is familiar with the story can post a link to it.

I will tell you that I believe most journalism programs at major universities are largely akin to trade schools. They pump out graduates who have been taught the "right" way to do things (the tools and techniques of the trade). But even great artists need training. Few painters can make a masterpiece the first time they pick up the brush. Journalists and other writers are no different. They need to be taught the fundamentals, but once they have learned those, the talented ones can then go on to put their personal stamp on their writing.

chgoeditor wrote:

MikeW665 wrote:Not to be harsh, but I would not consider newspapers, magazines, TV/radio commercials, and the like to be art, a craft maybe, but not art.

Some of it is more of a craft than an art, but if you believe that none of it is an art, I'd suggest you're reading the wrong periodicals. Eloquent, persuasive, clever and engaging writing can be found on the pages of many publications.

I quickly searched for, but was unable to find, an email I read within the last year from a British food critic to his editors. The food critic was outraged because the editors butchered his work without consulting him, and, in the process, managed to wreck a funny joke that the writer had built up throughout the column. I think you would have enjoyed reading it, because the original column did show grace and wit and artistry. (Although I agreed that the edited version was butchered, I still saw ways that the original could have been subtly improved.) Maybe another poster who is familiar with the story can post a link to it.

I will tell you that I believe most journalism programs at major universities are largely akin to trade schools. They pump out graduates who have been taught the "right" way to do things (the tools and techniques of the trade). But even great artists need training. Few painters can make a masterpiece the first time they pick up the brush. Journalists and other writers are no different. They need to be taught the fundamentals, but once they have learned those, the talented ones can then go on to put their personal stamp on their writing.

I agree with all your points in this and in your previous post, chgoeditor! I used to spend a good deal of time teaching undergraduates that the "rules" their high school English teachers had taught did not come down from Mt. Sinai. One of those rules was that sentences cannot begin with a conjunction. I also had to clarify that essays did not have to be exactly 5 paragraphs.

At any rate, the food critic piece you remember was discussed right here on LTHForum: viewtopic.php?p=207908#p207908

Now that I have revealed my past as an English professor, I know you all will be reading me with your red pencils in hand. Nothing used to throw cold water on a new acquaintance like my telling him or her what I did for a living. The response would be, "Oh, I better watch what I say!" English teachers may be disliked almost as much as food critics.

chgoeditor wrote:Some of it is more of a craft than an art, but if you believe that none of it is an art, I'd suggest you're reading the wrong periodicals. Eloquent, persuasive, clever and engaging writing can be found on the pages of many publications.

I will concede that point, but I still believe that if something is worth doing, it’s worth doing right/correctly.

seebee wrote:My absolute madness about punctuation/grammar is the apostrophe. It has gotten so far out of control. I'm sure I've posted this somewhere else, but I actually saw this street sign while living in Denver:

No Left Turn's

This was not a handmade sign, it was totally legit, hung high atop a stop light in whatever Dept of Transportation format.


There was an article a few years back in the trib magazine that I have not been able to find. I wanted to read it so badly. I think it was a half humorous thing called, "The Bastardization Of The Apostrophe."

Well, just like that, another example. Take a look at this "special's" board in the latest GTR post.

I'll never understand why whoever wrote the specials thinks that an apostrophe is the correct way to pluralize a word. When was this rule of grammar implemented? Isn't it easier to NOT add random punctuation?

Hell in a handbasket I tells ya.

stevez wrote:

seebee wrote:

stevez wrote:The comma's not missing, it's just misplaced before the word "and".

I do believe that commas are grammatically correct in both spots. There should be a comma before the word and.

Not generally. Usually, the comma is left off of the last word in a list. "Nice, quiet, beautiful and wonderful" is the correct syntax.

I too must disagree. Use or disuse of the "Oxford" comma is a matter of style choice, not correctness or incorrectness. Personally I am for it.

Katie wrote:I too must disagree. Use or disuse of the "Oxford" comma is a matter of style choice, not correctness or incorrectness. Personally I am for it.

Katie is correct. It is a style choice. Neither is incorrect.

seebee wrote:JBW - that puts the issue back to square one, no?
We have Rendered Sopressata and Grana Cheese which are two diferent ingredients in this dish, no?
According to your description, again, we have one kind of cheese: Rendered Sopressata Grana.

Not if you think of it as a compound cheese in the same manner as "basil butter" (assuming you're in a timewarp and its 1997 again......). I would read that as a grana cheese made with rendered sopressata. I am not about to weigh in on the punctuation and or spelling, because I am bad, bad, bad at both!