How to tackle any English essay question

--UPDATE-- 
I've made a new site dedicated solely to teaching academic writing! Click here to check it out! Every week you'll find a new tutorial, and every tutorial will be easy to read and easy to learn. I'm also writing an ebook that I'll give away free to anyone who subscribes. I hope the site proves useful!
Sadly, I will probably no longer be updating this site. But the new site is better. In every way. 

In my template for how to write an English essay, I used a rather straight forward essay question, i.e. 'Show how a character in a text presents a main theme'. This is a rather basic essay question, perhaps too basic; and while the structure of an essay may be easy for you, the essay questions you're told to answer might not be. In fact, if you read that last post, you were probably sitting there screaming, "But my essay question has nothing to do with character! And worse, it has nothing to do with theme! GIVE ME WHAT I WANT!"

So I wrote this post as well. It's really long.

Important: main theme, main idea, central idea, author's purpose, and all other such phrases mean the same thing. Feel free to put them into the 'theme' box.

To start, you should know that one of the most important rules for writing an English essay is that you should connect your essay question with a main theme, even if your essay question doesn't contain the words 'main theme'.

Why:

1. The goal in any essay is to show how something in the text conveys something relevant to society.
2. Themes are relevant to society.
3. Use a theme.

Q: What's a theme?
A: A theme is a recurring idea in a text, such as courage, discrimination, or something a little more specific, like kingship vs tyranny. (Hint: if you aren't sure what themes are present in your text, google them.)

In short, no matter your question, always talk about theme (with tight reference to the text) for the sake of making your text relevant. Make sense?

Let's pretend you've been given the following question:

First things first: substitute specific details for the general ones in your essay question.

The tricky part about this question lies in those last two words: 'surprised you'. Ugh.

Don't worry. It's easy. All you have to do is replace those dumb words with the reason that Lennie's death surprised you (even if, in truth, you weren't all that surprised).

Not all reasons are useful. Here are some examples:

GOOD reasons:
1. Lennie's death surprised me because it exposed the predatory nature of mankind.
2. Lennie's death surprised me because it reinforced the punishing nature of life on earth.

BAD reasons:
1. Lennie's death surprised me because it was unexpected.
2. Lennie's death surprised me because he killed Curly's wife by accident, and the others should forgive him.
2. Lennie's death surprised me because he was my favourite character. Sniffle.

There's a very important difference between a good reason and a bad reason. Good reasons, you'll notice, are themes! Bad reasons are not themes, and they trap you into talking about something that nobody cares about. Pick a GOOD reason, and you'll see that the words 'surprised you' have been conveniently substituted for a theme. Magic!

Note: even though the essay question doesn't contain the words 'main theme' or 'main idea' or whatever, that doesn't mean you can't discuss a theme. And if you can discuss a theme (which is always), you should discuss a theme. Why? Because a theme makes your essay, and the text, relevant to society. It answers a sort of "Why does this essay matter?"-type question, which is a very important question to answer.

You might be thinking, "But my teacher said to 'stick to the essay question'. Isn't talking about theme, when 'theme' wasn't specifically mentioned, bad?"

Nope! By talking about theme, you're simply answering the essay question - whatever it is - in the way it was designed to be answered. It's an essay, remember, not a plot summary.

Think about it. If your essay question didn't state the words, "With reference to a text you've studied..." would that mean "don't reference a text you've studied"? Of course not. You'd fail every time - EVERY TIME - if you avoided referencing a text.

"Yeah, all right," you say, "so that question wasn't so bad. But there are worse ones!"
And you're right; there are worse ones. Let's take a look at one of them.

Such a stupid question, right? Who cares? (The person who hands out grades, that's who.)

It's difficult even to substitute stuff; but don't worry, you don't need to. All you have to do is describe a main incident and how that incident shaped future events. Then, explain what that shaping of events meant for the text as a whole (but secretly with reference to a theme).

To do this, it's important to remember why you're writing this essay. You're writing this essay to make a point that readers should care about. In this sense, it's kind of like writing a persuasive speech, or having an argument with your mum. You're right, they're wrong. Prove it.

So, for an essay to work, you need to have something that the marker should care about, and you need to know why they should care about it. In the first essay question (above), the marker isn't going to care that Lennie is your favourite character, but they are going to care that John Steinbeck used Lennie's death to convey a theme. This theme is a much better foundation for your essay, rather than, "Uh, he was my favourite character."

It works the same for the second question. With regards to the shaping of future events, the marker isn't going to care that the death of a mouse led to the death of a man, but they are going to care if John Steinbeck used this death of mouse/man to show something, like, I don't know, a theme.

Look at the question again. It's an annoying question because it doesn't look theme-able. But to make it theme-able, all you need to do is apply that unspoken question I revealed earlier. "Why does it matter?" This is the underlying question that any essay question is and isn't asking you. You need to answer it because it makes your essay relevant to society. I keep saying that.

Anyway, the answer to the question "why does it matter?" is this:
It (the shaping of future events) matters because it presents a theme (or themes). It impacts the text as a whole because it helps the text present the theme. And it's this theme which you can use to relate the text to society.

In other words, what the essay question is really saying is this:

Admittedly, this is a trickier essay question to manage than one of those 'character to theme' or 'setting to theme' or 'relationship to theme' ones. So, below you'll find an essay I prepared earlier (It will help if you've read the book, Of Mice and Men). In it, I chose to a) describe the incident that changed the course of future events first, and then b) explain the themes presented from the impact that this change had on the text as a whole.

Note: This (a) then (b) process is recommended when answering two-part questions such as this one. It's also recommended that you answer the essay question in the order that it's given. Do the describing, then do the explaining. (If your essay question just says 'explain' or 'analyse' or 'discuss', then don't worry about describing anything.)

Here's the essay:

(Unsure about how to structure an English essay? Click here)

At the heart of every essay is a message to society. In other words, you get marks for making the text relevant to today. The easiest way to make a strong case for why your text is relevant to today is through theme. Therefore, theme-ify your essay question. Next, find proof from your text (examples - ideally with quotes and/or techniques). Finally, explain how your proof is evidence of your theme.

© Matthew Ferri 2014 (no plagiarising)

Read More

The be-all rule for using apostrophes

Correct usage of the apostrophe is a lot more straight forward than most people think, despite all the evidence otherwise (see: internet). In fact, one friendly rule can be used to solve every apostrophe crisis, and that rule is:

**Apostrophes are tags**

Seriously. That’s all they are. If you think of apostrophes as tags, you'll never be confused again.

Basically, when you’re tagging (attaching) a word to another word, add an apostrophe. When you aren’t, don’t.

Here’s how it works:

Tagging to indicate possession
Rule: When tagging to indicate possession, put the apostrophe on the end of that word. If there isn't an 's', add one of those, too.

Case 1:
Kirin the Enquirer: “Hi there. So, I have this sentence. It goes, ‘The laptop belongs to Matt.’ I want to attach the word ‘belongs’ to the word ‘Matt’ in order to make them one word.”

Hello, friend, and how very resourceful of you. Sure thing; simply tag the words ‘belongs to’ to the word ‘Matt’ using an apostrophe and adding an ‘s’.

Case 1b:
Kirin: “Sweet rolls. Thanks! What about this one? The food belonging to the cat has gone stale.”

Same thing, partner. Merge’n’tag!

Case 2:
Kirin: “Right, but what if there are two or more cats, and the food belongs to all of them?”

Ah, a tricky question – not! Just go right on ahead and tag’em!

Kirin: “Whoa! You put the apostrophe after the ‘s’. What’s up with that??”

Nothing, squire. It’s the same idea as before. We took the word you wanted to use – cats – and tagged it with an apostrophe on the end of the word. But because 'cats' already has an 's', we didn't need to add one. Here’s a breakdown for you:

Word: Cat (without s)
Tagged form: Cat’s

Word: Cats (with s)
Tagged form: Cats’

Word: People (without s)
Tagged form: People’s

Word: Peoples (with s)
Tagged form: Peoples’


Case 3
Kirin: “Okay, got it, but what about possessive pronouns? Words like its, yours, his, hers. Why don’t they get apostrophes?”

Haven’t you been paying attention? You only add an apostrophe when you want to tag words together. However, possessive pronouns are words on their own. None of them consists of two words being joined together (tagged), so the apostrophe is unneeded.

Think about it. You wouldn’t write, “I think this laptop is your’s” because that expands to: “I think this laptop belongs to your.”
Yours, by itself, has already done the work of combining ‘belongs to’ and ‘you’.

Also, the opposite of yours is mine. If yours had an apostrophe, mine would need an apostrophe as well. Mine’. Min’e. Mine’s. You see my point.

In other words, because possessive pronouns are words on their own and not tagged words, and because they already do the apostrophe’s job by themselves, possessive pronouns don’t need an apostrophe – ever!
(Possessive pronouns include: yours, mine, his, her, theirs, ours, its*, whose*.)

*Examples in which you would use 'its' and 'whose':
"Shae, whose car was written off last week due to its engine disintegrating into dust, is going to the auction today."
"Whose car did you say it was?"
"Shae's; it's the car with its engine missing."

Kirin: “Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. But aren’t there, like, other itses and whoses, which are tags?”

Yes, there certainly are other itses and whoses, which are tags, but they're different. They come under contractions.


Tagging to indicate a contraction
Case 4
A contraction is an informal word that results from meshing two separate words together. An example of a contraction is the word doesn’t. It’s the contracted - and tagged - form of does and not.

Similarly, the word it’s is the tagged form of it and is or it and has. It’s (with the apostrophe) always means either 'it is' or 'it has', as in, “It’s really unfortunate that your car engine disintegrated into dust.”
So, if you put an apostrophe onto its in the *examples above, then you're indicating that the word has been tagged - that it is a combination of two or more words. That sentence will no longer make sense, and it will be in some serious need of proofreading.
Its = possession (belongs to it)
It’s = contraction (it is/it has)

The only other contraction worth noting is the word who’s – the tagged form of 'who is', or 'who has'.
Ask yourself, "Which two words am I tagging?" If the answer is you aren't, then use whose (see the *example above).
Whose = possession (belongs to someone)
Who’s = contraction (who is/who has)

Kirin (drunk): "Choice, thanks! One more thing. Can apostrophes be used to make singular words plu--"

No! Apostrophes cannot be used to make singular words plural. That’s what the letter 's' does. Apostrophes are, however, used to tag - either for possession, or for a contraction. That's all they're used for. That's all they will ever be used for. In other words, when you aren’t tagging, you shouldn’t be apostropheeing.

Read More

How to write an English essay

--UPDATE-- 
I've made a new site dedicated solely to teaching academic writing! Click here to check it out! Every week you'll find a new tutorial, and every tutorial will be easy to read and easy to learn. I'm also writing an ebook that I'll give away free to anyone who subscribes. I hope the site proves useful!
Sadly, I will probably no longer be updating this site. But the new site is better. In every way.

Recently, a friend asked me if I have a template I give to the students I tutor that breaks down essay writing into basic steps. The answer was yes and no. Every student is different; and while I do have a method that I teach them, I also adapt it to the given need of each particular student. What I didn't have was a template that students (and anyone else) could use to teach themselves. After four years, it was about time that I did.

The following template is structured to help high school students understand the steps and processes required to write a logically-structured English essay. If I had to be more specific, I'd say the following guidelines and examples are suited to a Year 12 or Year 13 student preparing for their English exam, though many of the principles apply to any literary or academic essay.

Some fundamental rules for any Literary Essay:

1. A basic Essay consists of an Introduction, three Body Paragraphs, and a Conclusion.
2. Since your Essay seeks to answer a question, every Body Paragraph must answer this question, but each body paragraph discusses a different topic to each other paragraph; it answers the essay question differently. Why? Because answering a question three times rather than once is like surveying a thousand people rather than a hundred. It's more credible.
3. The Body Paragraph structure goes like this: Statement, Example, Explanation, Relevance. Why? Because any logical argument uses this structure, and your Essay is more or less a set of three logical arguments.
4. It's about a million times better if you plan your Paragraph Topics and Examples ahead of writing your Essay.

Essay Structure

(If you already know the structure, but aren't sure how to answer your particular essay question, then click here)

Your Essay essentially consists of three different Sandwiches inside a fourth, all-consuming Burger Bun. Body Paragraph 1 is a Tuna Sandwich; Body Paragraph 2 is a Steak Sandwich; and Body Paragraph 3 is a Ham Sandwich. Holding these Sandwiches together are your Introduction (bottom half of burger bun) and Conclusion (top half of burger bun).

In other words, an Essay is a giant Sandwich Burger, and the best Essays make for the sandwich-iest of Sandwich Burgers.

Essay Topic

When choosing your Essay Topic, pick the topic that you know the most about. For instance, I chose this one.

Discuss how the influence of a character in a film you have studied helped to convey a main idea.

Now, before you do anything else, substitute specific terms for the general terms given in your Essay Topic. It makes it easier for you when you come to writing your Introduction.

Note that 'main idea', 'author's purpose', 'central idea', and other such phrases all mean the same thing as the word 'theme'.

Common question: "The essay topic didn't mention film techniques. Does this mean I can ignore them altogether?"
Answer: No! You might pass without a mention of film techniques, just as you might pass without using any quotes. To get a high mark, however, you will want to write as rich a discussion as possible, which means lots of quotes and lots of techniques!

The Introduction

Your Introduction is called an Introduction for a reason: it introduces the content for the rest of your Essay. In burger terms, it prepares the bottom of the burger bun for the three Sandwiches that you're about to assemble on top of it.

An Introduction must contain the following information: The title of your text; the name of the author/director; the main idea (theme) you've chosen; the three topics you're going to discuss that prove (or justify) your main idea; and why the reader should care.

So, for your Introduction, here is the information you might use:

Title: Equip Your Comma or Die

Director: Conifer Miteroot

Theme: Good grammar prevents chaos

Paragraph topics: 1) Anna's introduction; 2) teenagers' change in perspective; 3) Anna's death.
Message for society: Preservation of language

Assuming that this film actually existed, here's an introduction that you might write based on the above information:

Tips for your Introduction: 

1. If you don't know how to start your Intro, begin with the phrase 'In so and so's text...' and, from there, turn your Essay topic into a declarative sentence, as above.
2. Never use the phrase 'In this essay...'. It's as tacky as a novel beginning with the words 'Once upon a time...'.
3. Don't consider the length of your Intro; it has nothing to do with anything. Instead, focus on the information that your Intro is supposed to provide. As soon as you've covered everything, move on to your Body.
4. Each Sandwich must be its own flavour; every paragraph topic must be different.
5. The message to society part of your Intro simply means stating what the overall message is to us as viewers.

Congratulations! You've now completed the bottom half of your burger bun.

The Body 

The body consists of your three Sandwiches. Each Sandwich must be compiled with the right ingredients for its desired flavour (topic), and these ingredients must also be compiled in the correct order. In case you've forgotten the order, it goes as follows:

Statement - A declarative sentence, or a bold claim that has yet to be proven. (For instance, the first sentence of my Introduction is a Statement.)

Example - Briefly describe the part of a scene from the text that you believe provides proof for your Statement.

Explanation - Explain your Example to show how it connects with your Statement.

Relevance - Show how your proven Statement is evidence of the main idea (theme).

For some people, it's easier to pretend you're answering four questions:

Statement - What is one scene from the text in which the theme was shown?

Example - Where's the proof?

Explanation - What's your point?

Relevance - What has your point got to do with the theme?

Don't move on until you've answered all four questions!

Tips for building your Sandwich (Body Paragraph):

1. Always start with a Statement and always end with your Relevance.
2. In between your Statement and your Relevance, you may have as many Examples and Explanations as you like, so long as you never leave an Example unexplained.

Here's a Body Paragraph you might write for the first Paragraph Topic:

Quotes and Techniques
The use of quotes is expected from you for any English essay, and the use of film techniques is expected from you for any English film essay. Why? Because the theme is always shown through the use of techniques. Anna Postrophe's character introduced order within chaos not because I said so, but because the arguing stopped upon her arrival. This shift in mood was supported through her orderly clothes (costume), the light from the street sign (lighting) and her cane (props). If you point out these details and then explain how they support the theme, you'll get lots of points!

Treat your Examples and Explanations as meat for your Sandwich, and treat quotes and techniques like sauces. Sauces add flavour to the meat you've already added; they show finesse in the art of Sandwichery. But never try to use quotes or techniques to make your points for you. You must have meat in order to add sauce!

Assemble two more Sandwiches, and then you'll be up to...

The Conclusion
My personal formula below makes Conclusions as basic as your Introduction.

Rephrase Intro - Restate the first part of your Intro in different words.
Summarise Body - Write a brief summary of your three Body Paragraph points.
Reflect - State what we as viewers can learn from the film.

Here's an example.

And that's the top of the burger bun!

Conclusion tips:

1. If you're finding it hard to rephrase your Introduction, simply start the sentence with a different word. In the Intro I began with the word "in", while in the conclusion I began with the author's name.
2. The summary in the Conclusion is a rephrased version of the summary in the Intro.
3. The Reflect section is entirely made up. End how you like, so long as it follows from what you've already discussed. This section is also a rephrased and fluffier version of the 'relation to society' sentence that you wrote in your Introduction.

More tips:

1. For the Intro and Conclusion, never write anything you'll have to explain. Remember, the Examples and Explanations form the meat for your Sandwiches, and your Sandwiches form your Body.
2. The content for your Introduction and your Conclusion is based on what you write in your Body. For this reason, many students find it easier to write their Body first before writing their Introduction and Conclusion.
3. Never repeat yourself.
4. The Essay structure above applies to any literary essay, not just film. The only differences are the techniques.
5. For higher marks, strain your vocabulary, apply accurate grammar and punctuation, and vary the structure of your sentences.

How to answer any English essay question

Copyright Matthew Ferri 2014

Read More

The Rulebook for Facebook. Ten things you should never do.

It's something of a virtual garden, this Facebook. Out of the soil we call newsfeed grows fruits, vegetables, flowers and weeds. The weeds are villains, as you will know, strangling every flower of life and substance, capturing every fruit beneath stem and sprout. I try to hide them myself, but the task is no lasting cure, and the routine is growing ever more onerous. Perhaps I should quit this garden altogether. Or… or I could share the following list with the world. Yes. Yes I see it now. This is the cure! Uh, right. Ahem.

You should never…

1. Facebook your problems

You won't get my attention, no matter how vague you are. In fact, you'll get my UN-attention. That is, I will hide you.

2. Send people game requests

Every time I get a game request, I a) block said request, b) consider blocking the requester, and c) think to myself, "I'd rather play a real game." And then I do.

3. Instagram photos of food

Trust me, honey, you ain't gonna make that fried chicken look any less nasty no matter which photo editing programme's ass you worship.

4. Say "Hi" to me (and nothing else) after years of silence

Crickets chirping. Tumbleweed hovering. A vulture squawking. Me ignoring (you).

5. Upload photos of yourself posing in front of a mirror

Look at yourself! Oh wait, you are, all the time. That's admirable.

6. Use a false name

I will likely forget who you are and unfriend you.

7. Ask me why I unfriended you

I might be tempted to use a false name so you can't... oh wait.

8. Write something entirely unrelated to the status under which you're commenting

Status: Bought our first house!

Appropriate comment: Nice!

Inappropriate comment: Did I leave my phone in your car? *hic*

9. Add me even though you've never met me

If you do this, I'll have to go through the tiring process of clicking on your profile, scanning your friends list for any mutual friends, your timeline for anything familiar, and my memory for some past event involving you. After having zero success on all accounts, I'll see that you've added anyone and everyone. Well don't, stranger! It's annoying!

10. Upload a photo of yourself with the caption, "Lol, I'm so ugly" (or some variation that implies the same thing).

Lol, I'm such a noob at grammar. Lol, I don't know the first thing about spelling. Lol, what is English? Lol. WE AREN'T IDIOTS.

Read More

YOLO and Idiocracy

I recently saw a film called Idiocracy, in which Joe Bauers gets cryogenically frozen for 500 years, only to reawaken to a world full of idiots. The premise makes the assumption that families who are more productive tend to be less intelligent, more intelligent couples produce less kids, and, therefore, the intelligent die out, and the stupid survive.

Makes sense, I thought; but it wasn't until the year 2505 that I was rendered fully petrified.

In this new society, Starbucks is a brothel of sorts, rubbish dumps reach higher than Everest, and plants are 'watered' with Gatorade because "it has electrolytes". When Mr Bauers asks a bunch of loiterers for directions, they get mad and one of them says, "You're starting to sound faggy." When he pleads with a stranger to help him, and promises gold for his assistance, the stranger replies, "I like moneys." And when Joe enquires where he can get water to drink, the response is, "What, like, water from the toilet?"

I can't speak much for the film's premise since, as it happens, I'm not exactly playing my part in spawning a formidable team of mini-Matts. But needless to say, this extreme decline in human intelligence (and with it, the English language) left me asking, "Could this be happening right now?" And you know what? I think it could, evidenced by the infamous term "YOLO!"

It's a shame it's white. There'll be no hope of concealing my vomit.

Aside from the fact that saying YOLO makes whatever you've just said, are saying, or are about to say contain 100% less integrity, it's also a contradiction. You only live once, yes, so why are you wasting your breath (and reputation) saying YOLO? The term destroys itself, yet no one seems to notice.

Thankfully, not one of my friends takes it seriously. For instance, when Naomi says it, she puts on an extremely pompous English accent and drags the word until you've forgotten whatever it is she was on about. And then we all laugh.

Like 'yous' and 'totes' and other mutations of language, YOLO must only be said as a joke or a jest. We must expose the mutation for what it is, for there are those who do use the term seriously, and it's these people who serve only to pave the slippery slope down which intellect itself will soon tumble and fall... from a teetering pile of junk (a metaphor for crappy words and acronyms) the size of Mount Everest.

And as for the mini-Matts, well, at least now I have a sensible reason to have kids!

Read More

Does Grammar really Matter?

Grammar and Punctuation¹: a volatile blend of simplicity and complexity. Simple in purpose, yet horrendously difficult to master. Each one of us knows what the term means - it isn't rocket science - but when it comes to hearing its application, I oftentimes close my eyes, picturing a cave occupied by men and women. They wear the skins of primitive beasts, and their tools are a collection of stones and bones. Fittingly, like the mammoth they slew and from whose bones they procured, grammar and punctuation is too great a beast to simply tame. It must be laid to rest.

Forsooth, some say that grammar doesn't matter; that it is an old-fashioned mix of arbitrary rules belonging to a minority who refuses to adapt; that those who claim to be well-versed are all compensating for things of actual significance that they lack; or that it is only relevant in some situations, like during a job interview or an exam.²

Such claims are bold, but they are no bolder than the ones proclaimed from those who hold a different view. Indeed, some would go so far as to say that grammar and punctuation might be the Achilles heel of today's Western society.

To those who uphold the former-most view, that language is changing, and that we ought to change with it: I agree. Language is always changing, much like fashion. Yet, no matter the fashion, there are standards; and in every instance, there is a scale ranging from inappropriate to over-dressed, with just right sitting in the middle. It is the same with grammar. There are standards, even today - standards that many people would rather do away with. I might want to wear shorts and a tee shirt instead of a suit to my wedding, but you would all gawk at me (or not attend) if I actually did. Likewise, I gawk at the eight out of ten native English-speaking people who can't differentiate 'have' from 'of'.

Granted, this comparison fails to shed any light as to why grammar and punctuation matters in the strictest sense of the word, and it even appears to support the claim that grammar is only important in some situations, like during a job interview or an exam. Perhaps that is because this claim is spot on. Just like most things, finely-tuned grammar only truly matters when its counterpart, poor grammar, bears unwanted consequences. Applying sun block at the beach matters because, if I don't, I'll get burnt. Correctly-punctuated writing matters in an exam because the alternative is to lose marks. Following is a spam email I recently received.

------------------

T-Mobile Nederland BV
Waldorpstraat 60,
2521 CC Den Haag,
The Netherlands.
online-client service.

CONGRATULATION!

From T-mobile NL we are proud to inform you that your email address have
won you 850,000.00euros from our online anual coordination.

Chose an option which you will like to receive your winnings presenting
along side your winning reff number: NL/VV5-421/0031012.

(1). Come to the Redemption centre here in the Netherlands.
(2). On-line Bank Transfer
(3). Courier Delivery service

Congratulations once again.
Regards,
Robijn van-kloose.
Award Coordinator for T-mobile NL

------------------

A sore thumb is a grave understatement in illustrating just how jarring this email is to anyone with half a brain. Indeed, it is completely submerged in discrepancy. You might have noticed that the word in capitals is missing a letter. Just one letter of a fifteen-letter word, yet we all notice it, and I'm sure we would all agree that it is unacceptable. Even with the 'S', the word itself, capitalised to grab the reader's attention, is a tell-tale sign of spam, yet the typo (I'll give them that much) is icing on the cake. Then there are 99 others. You see, even if I would have been so easily fooled, this one slip up is the ultimate sacrifice of credibility.

Credibility. It matters.

Things that uphold credibility: research, enthusiasm, confidence, good grammar.

If you can't back up a claim, prepare to be criticised. If your tone is dry and stale, prepare to be ignored. If you sound as confused as the people you're trying to instruct, prepare to be questioned. If your grammar is atrocious, then you can forget about everything else; you're going in the spam folder! Essentially, in all cases where you want to be taken seriously, strong grammar and punctuation strictly does matter.

via cheezburger.com

But what about in all other cases? Does grammar matter on Facebook, on Skype, or in casual emails? Your first response might be: no, it doesn't. You have nothing to prove on these mediums; you type like you talk; and there is no reason to put any effort into it. Fair enough, I say. And once again, I completely agree. In fact, I see no need to comment on the structure of someone's imperfect Facebook status when there isn't any pressing reason for them to write it correctly. If everyone understands it, and it makes sense, then that's all that matters. My hope is that, in cases where grammar does matter, they know what to do, and they'll get it right.

There is a difference, however, between a man who knows better but simply doesn't care, and a man who strives to get his grammar and punctuation correct, yet falters at the last word. My view is that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In other words, it's only when there's a genuine mistake that I consider addressing the author. In such a case, my train of thought plays something like this: "If John has made a grammatical mistake despite making an effort not to, then he is likely to make the same mistake at a later time when it may prove detrimental." What is the next step upon this realisation? Do I point out the food caught between his teeth, or do I leave it unnoticed, hoping that he won't be too embarrassed when he eventually gets given a mirror?

In essence, grammar and punctuation on mediums like Facebook doesn't matter, or at least it wouldn't matter if these social mediums were the be all and end all of communication. But they aren't. Eventually, you will write something - a report, an essay, a personal statement - in which your understanding of grammar and punctuation will be your backbone. A good performance requires practice. Whether or not your grasp of English needs a polish is entirely up to you. Perhaps you know it well enough; but when it comes down to it, will you know where to place the apostrophe, if any? Should there be a comma before the quotation, or not? And can you properly distinguish its and it's, or there, their and they're? Your lecturer can. Your employer can. If you can't, then teach yourself. Google it, learn it, then practise it. 

Facebook, text, email - they might not matter right now, but they will matter when it's too late. For the sake of a job interview or exam, it's not unheard of to, you know, prepare.

For those times where grammar and punctuation strictly matters, every other instance may or may not matter in retrospect. It is your call to make. But it's all part of a constitution, and governing that constitution is a language that probably stems from your childhood. Do you remember? You learned a 26-letter alphabet, and you came to appreciate 26, not 25, distinct characters as the building blocks for communication. Today, not once do you forget one and replace it with more of the others. You accepted the whole package. It was either that, or nothing at all. Creating your own language, choosing your own rules, it doesn't work. You speak English, a constitution complete with standards and guidelines. Typing "your" when you mean "you're" is like spelling CONGRATULATIONS without the S. It's incomplete and, quite frankly, irresponsible. This, my friends, is why grammar and punctuation matters. It's the same reason the letter 'S' matters in the English alphabet. Forget everything else. You can punctuate and spell how you like on Facebook; you can rebel against your employers with a typo-ridden resume; but you can't then call it English. English has 26 letters; it has spelling and grammar rules; and it has punctuation marks.

If you say "should of" or "yous" or "Some-think", then by all means, keep saying these things. I trust you of all people are the smartest of us all, for your grasp of language is so firm that you feel confident to play with it, as if the tendon above the heel bears no limit to its stretch.

----------------

1. As both nouns are part of the same constitution, I'm treating them as a single term. For instance, "Parks and Recreation" IS a TV program.

2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY I love this!

Read More

Totes, I say

“Totes!”

“Totes? Did you just say totes!?”

“Yeah, did I offend you? Haha.”

“‘Totes’ is a terrible abbreviation and should be reserved strictly for sarcasm. In my books, ‘totally’ and ‘totes’ are not synonymous.”

“What’s ‘synonymous’?”

“Oh dear.”

Recently added to the standard list of abbrevs, ‘totes’ is defs not very presh!

I first heard it used a couple of years ago. In a conversation with a friend of a friend, I casually asked, “Are you glad to be back?”

With a flick of the hair and a stumble of the high heel, she replied, “TOTES!” 
I stood petrified, and not because of her lisp. It took me a moment to work out what this monstrous abbreviation stood for. And when I did, the connotation was violently ingrained in my mind.

If you’re anything like me, you can understand how gross the word, like almost all other abbreviations of its kind, sounds. It succeeds in doing the unnecessary job in chopping one syllable off a three-syllable word, but it makes the speaker sound horribly uneducated. It’s like blurting out “Bah!” not with the intention of impersonating a sheep, but simply to add your two cents.

I know I’m not alone in this world. Anna, an angel sent from heaven to help me smite the world of its poor grammar, agrees with me. She recently revealed that the word we seek to destroy is, in fact, its very own weakness. In order for it to destroy itself, we (Anna, those of you who care, and I) must become wielders of the word and master it. But unlike the heathens who use it with as much fervour as they would ‘loathe’, our job is to be perpetually conscious for when the word ought to be used. Sarcasm. 

Sarcasm is the key.

Pretend you’re a guy who hasn’t shaved in a while and you’re meeting up with a friend.

“When was the last time you shaved?” he asks.

“This morning,” you reply through the coarse tendrils of your beard.

“Re-really?”

“Totes!”

See what you’ve done? You’ve appealed to his folly. Not all people are as gullible; most would probably reply, “No, seriously, take my hedge trimmers.” But for those who don’t, sarcasm is called. If you strictly use ‘totes’ in such contexts, they’ll learn that you only say it when you’re being sarcastic. And if you’re fortunate, it’ll rub off on them.

Conversely, the recipient of your sarcasm may in fact share your hatred for the word. Thus, using ‘totes’ in this way will spark a warm conversation about how stupid it sounds, after which you will have discovered another member in the legion of Totes (God-willing, poor grammar) Haters. It’s a win-win situation.

It is imperative to note, however, that ‘totes’ cannot be used at just any time where sarcasm is called. In the case above, the fool asking you when you last shaved is asking a serious question. The blatant sarcasm begins, and must always begin, from you with the word ‘totes’. Naturally, ‘totes’ is transformed from the absurd abbreviation for ‘totally’ into a light-hearted insult while justly undermining the integrity of the word itself, as well as its heathen hosts, all in the hope that they will see the error of their ways and repent. 

Let us all unite to repair the sundered veil which separates light from darkness!

Read More