EDITORIAL COMMENTS AND INTERPRETATION

[please note: most, but not all of what follows, are my own ideas regarding aspects of writing that I’ve commented on on your papers. I have not focused on paper organization, per se; mostly because all of the papers were fine in that regard. However, it is still useful to keep in mind that the opening and final paragraphs do serve a particular purpose in any good paper. In addition, I know you will find it useful to read the Orwell article before looking at the comments I’ve made on your papers. And finally, it will be useful for you to rework the Salt of the Earth papers shortly before doing the second paper. Or at least, go back over my suggestions on the first paper, and try to do your own editing in that context.

There are a number of “markings” and comments on your papers. I will try to indicate what I mean by them. First some general comments. None of what follows is in order of importance.

-----Very few (none, actually) papers had a problem with excessive use of commas. To the contrary; and I have added commas in your papers where I thought they helped. The following quote from the Chicago Manual of Style is relevant here.

The comma, perhaps the most versatile of the punctuation marks, indicated the smallest interruption in continuity of thought or sentence structure. There are a few rules governing its use that have become almost obligatory. Aside from these, the use of the comma is mainly a matter of good judgment, with ease of reading the end in view.

The point, I think, is in the last phrase. When we speak, it’s easy to hear the breath marks, but less so in writing. Perhaps you were taught to avoid an over-use of commas. Fine, but I think that the additions I’ve made are helpful.

-----There were mistakes in the use of the apostrophe; first of all, a very common error is to write “it’s” as a possessive, since it seems so natural to do so. It’s wrong to do so. “It’s” is the contraction for “It is.” In other words, this is one case where the possessive does not deserve an apostrophe. However, there were a number of instances where you failed to use the apostrophe. These I’ve tried to note in your papers.

----- Also in the spirit of “ease of reading,” I don’t like the format of uniform margins on the right hands side of the page. What this does is space the words in the line so as to fit the space, and as a result, can product pretty “uneven” spacing as far as ease of reading goes. If you look at published books, where the margins are indeed even at both the right and the left, the printing within the line keeps the words and letters flowing. This is not the case for most of our more primitive word processing programs. (a personal preference, and not a matter of grading, etc.!)

-----Another personal preference: I certainly like the word, “film,” as opposed to “movie.”

-----And I have an aversion to words such as “so,” and “like.” Try not to start a sentence, or a phrase with “so.” This seems to me to be much more acceptable in conversation than in writing. In almost every case, “thus,” or some similar word is a bit better. We (some of us) tend to use “like” in speech to a considerable extent, “like, you know what I mean.” There are times when the word is fine, but not always. “I like good writing,” is fine.

-----With regard to the location of quotation marks: there is an “American” version and an English (European) version. Both are correct, but, this is a case where “when in Rome…” applies. Quotes ALWAYS go outside of periods and commas (American). Question marks depend on whether or not what is being quoted is itself a question (then ?”) or of the quote is just part of the question (then “?). And in general, colons and semi-colons go OUTSIDE of the quotes.

-----My own version of editing marks—not in keeping with proper editing etiquette—are as follows:

  1. I will often underline a word or phrase, without any further indication. This means that I think a better word or phrase can (sometimes, should) be used.
  2. There are times when an entire sentence is less than wonderful. It may be an incomplete sentence, or simply lacking in clarity and or awkward. I try to indicate this by putting brackets around the sentence ([…]) and adding the relevant word.
  3. My indication for when I think your paragraph should be broken into two, will have a “par” in the margin, and a slash (/) where I think the second paragraph should go.
  4. If I circle a word, it is usually a misspelled word, or the wrong spelling; e.g., “there” when you mean “their,” “here” when you mean “hear,” etc. This is different from an underlined word, where the spelling is okay, but the choice of word could be better.
  5. On occasion, you have used an incorrect (by me reckoning) punctuation mark; in these cases I have simply over-ridden your mark.
  6. In the spirit of Orwell, and all good writing, I have on occasion simply lined out words that I thought were unnecessary. IN GENERAL, AND ALWAYS, IT PAYS TO TAKE WHAT YOU THINK OF AS YOUR FINAL DRAFT AND SEE HOW MANY MORE WORDS YOU CAN ELIMINATE.

FINALLY, AND MOST RELEVANT, IS THE EFFORT YOU PUT INTO YORU THINKING AND WRITING. AS I INDICATED, I HAVE NO COMPLAINTS AT ASLL WITH YOUR FIRST PAPERS. READING THEM WAS AS MUCH PLEASURE AS IT WAS WORK, AND I APPREICIATE THAT. KEEP IT UP!!!