Spell/Grammar Check Program

[Comshaw]

Keep in mind that all grammar checkers are designed around a framework of perfect English. That's fine if you're writing a dissertation, a professional paper or some other work along those lines. Here though we deal mainly in fiction which falls under the heading of creative writing. Sometimes creative means you break the rules to make the story better.

I use Grammarly and am constantly irritated by red underlines. The vast majority are corrections I should make. Some are not. Many of those corrections are because, being a sausage-fingered typist, I don't worry about formatting or punctuation corrections until I have it all down. So when I go back to do that chore there is usually a lot of them. Most are things I do correct, some though are words and phrases that are intentionally out of phase with what is considered to be correct.

As far as the Oxford (Harvard or serial comma if you will) to me it appears to be nothing more than some stuffy "you must" leftover from the past and a waste of time. The only time I will use it is if it clarifies a thing. What it comes down to it, use it all the time or don't; I don't.

Here are a couple of quotes from the Grammarly site:

Brittney, Grammarly’s resident style maven, puts it this way:

“Oxford commas are like the Ugg boots of the punctuation world. People either love them or hate them or don’t know what they are.”

“When it comes to AP vs. Chicago style, I think a lot of people forget the importance of the word style. The important thing to remember is when the style isn’t working for you, you should do what works.”

In essence, no matter who insists you must if it doesn't fit your style don't use it.

Comshaw

 

[KeithD]

To publishers, it's about the readers/buyers. It isn't all about the author. "Well, I understood what I meant," doesn't go far with an actual publisher.

 

[SimonDoom]

Keep in mind that all grammar checkers are designed around a framework of perfect English. That's fine if you're writing a dissertation, a professional paper or some other work along those lines. Here though we deal mainly in fiction which falls under the heading of creative writing. Sometimes creative means you break the rules to make the story better.

I use Grammarly and am constantly irritated by red underlines. The vast majority are corrections I should make. Some are not. Many of those corrections are because, being a sausage-fingered typist, I don't worry about formatting or punctuation corrections until I have it all down. So when I go back to do that chore there is usually a lot of them. Most are things I do correct, some though are words and phrases that are intentionally out of phase with what is considered to be correct.

As far as the Oxford (Harvard or serial comma if you will) to me it appears to be nothing more than some stuffy "you must" leftover from the past and a waste of time. The only time I will use it is if it clarifies a thing. What it comes down to it, use it all the time or don't; I don't.

Here are a couple of quotes from the Grammarly site:

Brittney, Grammarly’s resident style maven, puts it this way:

“Oxford commas are like the Ugg boots of the punctuation world. People either love them or hate them or don’t know what they are.”

“When it comes to AP vs. Chicago style, I think a lot of people forget the importance of the word style. The important thing to remember is when the style isn’t working for you, you should do what works.”

In essence, no matter who insists you must if it doesn't fit your style don't use it.

Comshaw

I think it's a matter of style and preference as opposed to a matter of right and wrong, but more often than not the presence of the serial comma makes the sentence clearer, and there are some cases where without it the meaning will be unclear.

For instance, in the sentence

I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty

The suggestion is that your parents are Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.

But if you insert the serial comma:

I love my parents, Lady Gaga, and Humpty Dumpty

Then it's clear that's NOT what you mean.

More often than not -- but not always -- the serial comma enhances clarity.

 

[Comshaw]

To publishers, it's about the readers/buyers. It isn't all about the author. "Well, I understood what I meant," doesn't go far with an actual publisher.

I think it's a matter of style and preference as opposed to a matter of right and wrong, but more often than not the presence of the serial comma makes the sentence clearer, and there are some cases where without it the meaning will be unclear.

For instance, in the sentence

I love my parents, Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty

The suggestion is that your parents are Lady Gaga and Humpty Dumpty.

But if you insert the serial comma:

I love my parents, Lady Gaga, and Humpty Dumpty

Then it's clear that's NOT what you mean.

More often than not -- but not always -- the serial comma enhances clarity.

Yes, I can in that instance see where it would clarify things. As I said I will use it if it does clarify things, but to my mind the majority of the time it's a wasted stroke.
A good example from the Oxford Royal Academy site:
https://www.oxford-royale.com/articles/oxford-comma/

Without Oxford comma: “Her favourite foods were chocolate, marshmallows, cake and chicken.”
With Oxford comma: “Her favourite foods were chocolate, marshmallows, cake, and chicken.”

While in the example you posted it would change the meaning, in the above example it wouldn't.

Also, they have this to say on the subject:
"Traditionally, the omission of the Oxford comma has been more common in newspaper publishing, where strict character limits are required in the narrow confines of printed columns. There is no consistency in its use or omission when looking at historical texts (it’s been used for centuries, but people have also been omitting it for centuries), but today, its use is generally more common among American style guides than it is among British ones..."

That said, now I see why they say it's such a contentious and hotly debated topic.

To each his own I suppose. I'll do what I do and ya'll can do your thing and we'll both be happy!

Comshaw

 

[KeithD]

Yes, well, I work for actual publishers. Anyone posting here hoping to move into the greater publishing world might consider avoiding the grief of where the "it's all about the author" attitude is going to get them in their journey beyond Literotica and Amazon self-publishing. But, yes, at Literotica, anything that gets past Laurel is just fine--until the comments and votes start coming in.

 

[innocntplay]

Ya'll know way more about the language than I do. If you trust your grammar type in something quick and easy edit like notepad++ then paste it into the java or html for posting.
Your spelling is already checked and you trust your grammar or can download a plugin to provide an opinion there too.

 

[KeithD]

Ya'll know way more about the language than I do. If you trust your grammar type in something quick and easy edit like notepad++ then paste it into the java or html for posting.
Your spelling is already checked and you trust your grammar or can download a plugin to provide an opinion there too.

Nope, absolutely no technical grammar program is going to beat learning the basics and the authorities to use yourself. The English language is too complex for you to be able to rely on lazy easy button approaches.

 

[Comshaw]

Yes, well, I work for actual publishers. Anyone posting here hoping to move into the greater publishing world might consider avoiding the grief of where the "it's all about the author" attitude is going to get them in their journey beyond Literotica and Amazon self-publishing. But, yes, at Literotica, anything that gets past Laurel is just fine--until the comments and votes start coming in.

Hmmmm...you're right about one thing, there is a definite difference between professional authors and those of us who write for no other reason than it's fun. I understand that. I also understand that an editor is there to make changes. I can do without the useless parts of the language and if they see the necessity of it, then they can add it. That's their job after all ain't it? Something like not using the Oxford comma isn't going to get a manuscript thrown out.

As an aside, that snippy little bolded part was unnecessary and a total load of road apples. The only people who would even notice, or vote a story down because of the absence of the hot debated aforementioned comma are obsessive/compulsive anal yahoos.

Comshaw

 

[KeithD]

I also understand that an editor is there to make changes.

I stopped reading there. Because, no, you don't understand the purpose of editors at all and take a very nasty and arrogant take on it. The purpose of the editorial process is to make the connection between the author and the reader as close-fitting as possible as well as the clarity to the reader the best it can be. No changes counter to that would be made by a professional editor.

In fact, professional editors don't "make changes." They raise suggested fixes to achieve clarity and/or conform to the publishing standards of whoever holds the final say. For a self-publishing author, that would be the author. For Literotica, it would be Laurel and, before that, the author. The author is the last one to have control over the file before it goes to Laurel. And, Laurel, as publisher here, has the last say on whether it meets Literotica standards. Almost daily we see evidence of her rejecting stories that don't meet her standards. In the greater world, if there's a publisher paying for this, it's the publisher who has the last say. It's never the editor unless the editor also is the publisher.

You don't really understand the purpose of an editor at all. You are stuck in "it's all about the author" and a hurt that anyone else could improve your precious baby.

 

[Comshaw]

I stopped reading there. Because, no, you don't understand the purpose of editors at all and take a very nasty and arrogant take on it. The purpose of the editorial process is to make the connection between the author and the reader as close-fitting as possible as well as the clarity to the reader the best it can be. No changes counter to that would be made by a professional editor.

In fact, professional editors don't "make changes." They raise suggested fixes to achieve clarity and/or conform to the publishing standards of whoever holds the final say. For a self-publishing author, that would be the author. For Literotica, it would be Laurel and, before that, the author. The author is the last one to have control over the file before it goes to Laurel. And, Laurel, as publisher here, has the last say on whether it meets Literotica standards. Almost daily we see evidence of her rejecting stories that don't meet her standards. In the greater world, if there's a publisher paying for this, it's the publisher who has the last say. It's never the editor unless the editor also is the publisher.

You don't really understand the purpose of an editor at all. You are stuck in "it's all about the author" and a hurt that anyone else could improve your precious baby.

Have you ever found a hat big enough? I don't think anyone has ever made one that size before.

Comshaw

 

[MillieDynamite]

Editors are there to suggest changes, not to make them. Proofreaders and line editors make suggestions on Grammar and punctuation. Creative Editors make suggestions on changes in the story itself. But it is up to the writer to accept or reject the changes as they see fit. Rejecting punctuation and grammar is rather dumb. Creative changes I'd have to think about those and debate if it was making the story better, diverting it away from what I wanted it to say, or the worst, an editors attempt to take over my story. I have only had one beta reader that tried to do that. Never has a paid editor tried to do anything other than make my story better. I don't pay editors for stories I intended to publish here.

 

[Comshaw]

Editors are there to suggest changes, not to make them. Proofreaders and line editors make suggestions on Grammar and punctuation. Creative Editors make suggestions on changes in the story itself. But it is up to the writer to accept or reject the changes as they see fit. Rejecting punctuation and grammar is rather dumb. Creative changes I'd have to think about those and debate if it was making the story better, diverting it away from what I wanted it to say, or the worst, an editors attempt to take over my story. I have only had one beta reader that tried to do that. Never has a paid editor tried to do anything other than make my story better. I don't pay editors for stories I intended to publish here.

It looks like I was wrong about editors making changes. Since I freely admitted I'm an amateur for fun writer, that has no experience with publishing professionally, that shouldn't be a big surprise. But from what you wrote if a "suggestion" on grammar or punctuation is dumb then it's much more than just a suggestion. It's more along the lines of, "do it or we don't publish" rather than a true suggestion.

However, this has devolved away from the original discussion, the Oxford comma. I still don't see the use in it the majority of the time and I won't be using it, even if and when I ever publish works for pay. And it's not like other punctuation marks. Half the English-speaking world sees it the same way I do. It seems to me, come right down to it, with all those factors weighed, it falls firmly in the realm of style and personal preference.

Comshaw

 

[MillieDynamite]

It looks like I was wrong about editors making changes. Since I freely admitted I'm an amateur for fun writer, that has no experience with publishing professionally, that shouldn't be a big surprise. But from what you wrote if a "suggestion" on grammar or punctuation is dumb then it's much more than just a suggestion. It's more along the lines of, "do it or we don't publish" rather than a true suggestion.

However, this has devolved away from the original discussion, the Oxford comma. I still don't see the use in it the majority of the time and I won't be using it, even if and when I ever publish works for pay. And it's not like other punctuation marks. Half the English-speaking world sees it the same way I do. It seems to me, come right down to it, with all those factors weighed, it falls firmly in the realm of style and personal preference.

Comshaw

I'm saying that if you ignore the suggested changes (outside of the character, "speak") which will make your words clearer, you are doing so at the cost of the reader. I'm not talking about the Oxford rule, and personally don't care if you use it or not.

 

[SimonDoom]

However, this has devolved away from the original discussion, the Oxford comma. I still don't see the use in it the majority of the time and I won't be using it, even if and when I ever publish works for pay. And it's not like other punctuation marks. Half the English-speaking world sees it the same way I do. It seems to me, come right down to it, with all those factors weighed, it falls firmly in the realm of style and personal preference.

Comshaw

The bottom line, for Literotica purposes, is it won't make any difference.

 

[ElectricBlue]

The bottom line, for Literotica purposes, is it won't make any difference.

Unless you're a grocer.

"That's an apostrophe, EB," Suzie reminded him.

 

[LAHomedog]

I have a couple of thoughts. Since I still have not mastered the art of posting more than one quote (having botched that now a couple of times) I'm just going to do it the old school way:

Keith: "In fact, professional editors don't "make changes." They raise suggested fixes to achieve clarity and/or conform to the publishing standards of whoever holds the final say."

I mostly agree with this all though like everything in life there are exceptions. I too have professionally edited. Not as many books as you, but a couple have made various NY Times Top 10 lists. And yes, an editor makes suggestions and it is the author's final say as to what he or she wants. It is their work. However, I have taken a non-fiction work and totally restructured its narrative and how the author guided his readers through the lessons he was trying to teach them. That was the assignment given to me by the publisher and with the author's blessing.

Comshaw: I was the person who originally brought up the Oxford comma in this thread, and I still don't know how I feel about its usage. My attorney wife who is a wordsmith and acts as one of my proof-readers hates it and constantly redlines them out of my drafts. My beta-reader, who is another author here on Lit, wants them as does Grammerly. However, I find I keep landing in how does the story read. How does the dialogue sound. If the comma helps, I use it. If the comma gets in the way, I don't. But then again, I have gotten spanked most of my life over how I punctuate because I tend to write how people speak and not necessarily what the rules state. Doesn't mean I'm right. Just my style.

 

[KeithD]

it is the author's final say as to what he or she wants. It is their work.

Um, no, not in the mainstream publishers' world. The publisher has the last say. They provide the editor a style sheet. The editor sends the edit to the author. If the author comes back in opposition to the style sheet, the editor tells them to take it up with the publisher, adding time to the process. And once the editor (who quite often is the one putting in the final changes in the file) receives instruction from the publisher, that's it--for everybody. I've known publishers who told "it's all about me" authors to take their manuscript and shove it at this point.

And I also give a "no" to Comshaw's most everything is published without what is being called the Oxford comma. Most everything being published in the humanities by mainstream publishers is still using the Oxford/serial comma and it's still recommended by what is the most-used style guide for American publishing, the Chicago Manual of Style. I assert that Comshaw is just wrong on that.

And if it's needed for some readers in some cases, there's no real reason other than stubbornness and author's asserting "it's all about me" not to use it in all cases.

It remains, of course, that anything you can get by Laurel is fine for Literotica--it's only your own bad habits you're engraining in your work if you just gotta go against standards.

 

[LAHomedog]

Um, no, not in the mainstream publishers' world. The publisher has the last say. They provide the editor a style sheet. The editor sends the edit to the author. If the author comes back in opposition to the style sheet, the editor tells them to take it up with the publisher, adding time to the process. And once the editor (who quite often is the one putting in the final changes in the file) receives instruction from the publisher, that's it--for everybody. I've known publishers who told "it's all about me" authors to take their manuscript and shove it at this point.

Well, as I've said many times, I don't do grammar and punctuation. I suck at it, but then again I'm dyslexic. I only do narrative, story structure, plot and dialogue. On the books I've helped on -- and yes, mainstream publishers -- there was always someone like you who followed after me with their style sheet in their hand.

I couldn't do what you do. My brain is not wired that way. I'm a visual-spatial thinker: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences

 

[Comshaw]

I'm saying that if you ignore the suggested changes (outside of the character, "speak") which will make your words clearer, you are doing so at the cost of the reader. I'm not talking about the Oxford rule, and personally don't care if you use it or not.

Yes, in an amateur story it will be at the cost of the reader, but we are talking about professional writers doing so for profit. The publishing company isn't going to allow much of anything that will cost them sales. While I said the editor makes changes, that was a misnomer. I should have said the Publishing Company does make changes and will demand IF they see it affecting sales.

As far as the Oxford comma, that was what I was talking about when the tracks got switched and the discussion I was trying to return to. I can understand you not caring if I use it. Why should you? The real question though, which you failed to address is: do you? And if so why?


Comshaw

 

[MillieDynamite]

Yes, in an amateur story it will be at the cost of the reader, but we are talking about professional writers doing so for profit. The publishing company isn't going to allow much of anything that will cost them sales. While I said the editor makes changes, that was a misnomer. I should have said the Publishing Company does make changes and will demand IF they see it affecting sales.

As far as the Oxford comma, that was what I was talking about when the tracks got switched and the discussion I was trying to return to. I can understand you not caring if I use it. Why should you? The real question though, which you failed to address is: do you? And if so why?


Comshaw

I do, because, as a ghostwriter, if I don't it will get changed. I'm not involved with the editing process, baring them wanting a rewrite due a creative editors not liking something. Even so, I try to make the editors job as easy as possible. But for here, I'm the mistress of my own ship and still use it.

 

[Comshaw]

I stopped reading there. Because, no, you don't understand the purpose of editors at all and take a very nasty and arrogant take on it. The purpose of the editorial process is to make the connection between the author and the reader as close-fitting as possible as well as the clarity to the reader the best it can be. No changes counter to that would be made by a professional editor.

If it is something that is needed for clarity, for the "best fit to the reader" then the editor will make changes? That's what your bolded sentence above implies and is a contradiction of your "editors don't make changes" statement below.
.

In fact, professional editors don't "make changes." They raise suggested fixes to achieve clarity and/or conform to the publishing standards of whoever holds the final say. For a self-publishing author, that would be the author. For Literotica, it would be Laurel and, before that, the author. The author is the last one to have control over the file before it goes to Laurel. And, Laurel, as publisher here, has the last say on whether it meets Literotica standards. Almost daily we see evidence of her rejecting stories that don't meet her standards. In the greater world, if there's a publisher paying for this, it's the publisher who has the last say. It's never the editor unless the editor also is the publisher.

So let me see if I can correct my statement: I said editors make changes. A misnomer. I should have said publishers make changes. My mistake was in my assumption that editors and publishers, being all part of a publishing company were interchangeable as far as delineating someone who can make changes. I stand corrected. So it seems publishers can make changes, which still supports my point that if they find it not to their liking they (as in the person or persons in a publishing company with the power to do so) WILL makes changes.

You don't really understand the purpose of an editor at all. You are stuck in "it's all about the author" and a hurt that anyone else could improve your precious baby.

Why is it you always insert some type of denigration into every conversation? Are you that bereft of confidence you require it to make you feel bigger? Better? More virile? It does nothing but shows what kind of person you are. That kind of response from people has always puzzled me greatly.

Um, no, not in the mainstream publishers' world. The publisher has the last say. They provide the editor a style sheet. The editor sends the edit to the author. If the author comes back in opposition to the style sheet, the editor tells them to take it up with the publisher, adding time to the process. And once the editor (who quite often is the one putting in the final changes in the file) receives instruction from the publisher, that's it--for everybody. I've known publishers who told "it's all about me" authors to take their manuscript and shove it at this point.

From the above, you're saying that the publisher, through the editor does demand changes. The publisher is the one who makes and hands down the style sheet. The editor is the intermediary who assures those stylistic changes are made. While the editor isn't the one demanding the changes, by your own words they are the one responsible to make them. In other words, you just said the editor makes changes! That completely contradicts what you said in a previous post, IE; "In fact, professional editors don't "make changes." You wanna try to reconcile those two disparate viewpoints?

And I also give a "no" to Comshaw's most everything is published without what is being called the Oxford comma.

If you will please, quote where I said anything of the kind. I can't seem to recall or find it. As an editor, you should be able to quote things accurately.

Most everything being published in the humanities by mainstream publishers is still using the Oxford/serial comma and it's still recommended by what is the most-used style guide for American publishing, the Chicago Manual of Style. I assert that Comshaw is just wrong on that.

You can assert anything you want. It doesn't mean you're right. Did you not read the excerpt I posted from the Oxford Royal Academy? You might want to back track and read it, if you can put aside your ego long enough.

And if it's needed for some readers in some cases, there's no real reason other than stubbornness and author's asserting "it's all about me" not to use it in all cases.
It remains, of course, that anything you can get by Laurel is fine for Literotica--it's only your own bad habits you're engraining in your work if you just gotta go against standards.

It's not needed for "some readers". It's needed for some situations and not others, as pointed out in an earlier post. Additionally, why should we use it in all cases? That's akin to giving everyone a shot of antibiotics even if they only have only a sniffle. A waste of time and effort.

The problem is that "the standards" aren't set in stone. 50% of the experts demand we use it all the time, while the other half says it's not necessary. Who to believe? You and the "it's cast in stone!" faction or the other side? This reminds me of some friends, the old Ford-Chevy debate. Motorheads will know what I'm talking about. It doesn't matter how good one or the other is, if you're a rabid fan of one, the other is a piece of shit. It's the same here. For every stylistic writing tome that can be pointed to supporting one side, there is another supporting the opposite side. Ain't nobody gunna win.

Comshaw

 

[Comshaw]

I do, because, as a ghostwriter, if I don't it will get changed. I'm not involved with the editing process, baring them wanting a rewrite due a creative editors not liking something. Even so, I try to make the editors job as easy as possible. But for here, I'm the mistress of my own ship and still use it.

Thanks. I like your last sentence and in essence why I don't use it. "The Master of my own ship." I'm a huge fan of things like that, that roll off the tongue and instill a bit of class in an otherwise mundane statement.

Comshaw

 

[ElectricBlue]

As an editor, you should be able to quote things accurately.

And spell.

https://www.literotica.com/stories/memberpage.php?uid=1365194&page=bio

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41rdU+suTbL.jpg

https://www.smh.com.au/entertainmen...lition charge, effectively a gigantic grenade.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Thanks. I like your last sentence and in essence why I don't use it. "The Master of my own ship." I'm a huge fan of things like that, that roll off the tongue and instill a bit of class in an otherwise mundane statement.

Comshaw

Thanks Comshaw, I think. The Master of my own ship this tends to be a full blown Cliché even if you change master to mistress. LOL But I accept compliments of most kinds. I'm hoping it wasn't a lefthanded one.

 

[LAHomedog]

And spell.

That is not necessarily the case. It depends upon your role and function. If a writer needs help with story structure, the narrative they are telling, character developed or dialogue that is a totally different function than the editor's role that KeithD so accurately described. Different jobs.

And referring back, since I'm thinking the statement above was about my earlier post, I did not say I can't quote someone accurately. I said that I haven't mastered how to do multiple quotes from multiple posts accurately within the format of this board.