Voice
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
projects down the line. I dunno. At the moment it's more a
cloud on the horizon, the size of a man's hand... And since
it's the first time I've hit this particular difficulty, I
thought I'd ask how other people do it. You never know what
generally useful stuff might turn up. <g>
Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
Narrative voice, I mean. Conversations aren't a problem.
Inside the people's heads isn't a problem.
I've had a couple of false starts (hence, back on back
burner). I've re-read what I've written, each time, and
thought 'Bleeding hell, girl, why don't you get a job as a
road-sweeper? That would be of /much/ more use to the world
than this trite load of old cobblers'.[1]
I don't think there's anything wrong with the story itself:
/it's/ not trite (as much as one can ever tell). I just
can't find the right tone, the right voice, maybe the right
narrator's attitude (which is different from the character's
attitude) towards what's happening.
Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
turn up? Or should I go back to making stabs at different
options in the hope something clicks?
I may steal the trick from the novel-in-November folks I've
seen here, and just try to bash out something (anything!)
without reading back while I'm doing it. This didn't do too
well for the false starts, though. So...
Mary
[1] No offense intended to road-sweepers. It used to be
possible to get temporary summer road-sweeper jobs when I
lived on the south coast, and being suntanned brown and out
of doors all day did appeal to me. Instead, I ended up
getting a part-time job cleaning toilets in a girls' school.
<shudder>
Tony Jebson
[snip]
> Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
> they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
[snip]
> I don't think there's anything wrong with the story itself:
> /it's/ not trite (as much as one can ever tell). I just
> can't find the right tone, the right voice, maybe the right
> narrator's attitude (which is different from the character's
> attitude) towards what's happening.
Hmm . . . maybe it's not the voice that is wrong but the choice
of protagonist. You could experiment with this.
Alternatively, maybe experimenting around some stupid
questions would help:
Is the narrator reliable or unreliable?
How omniscient it the narrator?
At what psychological distance is the narrator? Up close and
personal or remote and detached?
How does the voice of the narrator relate to the crisis and/or climax?
Anyway, what am I doing? You're a Published Author, I've never
written a bit of fiction in my life and I'm giving you advice ;-)
OK, I lied, I'm trying to write something but think naive neophyte.
[snip]
--- Tony Jebson
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
> turn up? Or should I go back to making stabs at different
> options in the hope something clicks?
You could try first-person with several different characters as the
narrator, and see if any one of them approaches the needed voice. Then
you can step back and go third-person narrator (if you want) keeping the
same tone?
With first person you can commit to paper things you'd be dead ashamed
of been seen writing as third person narrator. I think (I've never
tried, I'm not very good at doing voices, my several first-persons
narrators that I used to use when I was a kid all sounded just the
same). (Well, I'm thinking of Brust's Khaavren novels right now).
--
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
Gens una sumus
Patricia C. Wrede
writes:
>Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
>turn up?
Try picking somebody and doing it first-person. Then the narrative voice has
to be the same as the character's voice. If the story screams and yells, you
ignore it until it starts telling you "Not like that! Like *this*!", at which
point you've got it.
Or you start by coming up with four or five slightly different voices that you
*could* use, theoretically, and then try to decide which of them feels closest,
and try to develop something workable out of that. If you have enough false
starts, maybe you could use those -- if any of them seemed closer than the
others, can you figure out *why* it was closer?
Patricia C. Wrede
Boyd & Michelle Bottorff
> Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
> they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
>
> Narrative voice, I mean. Conversations aren't a problem.
> Inside the people's heads isn't a problem.
The one I'm working on now was like this.
I started in the protagonists voice, and it didn't work, didn't work,
didn't work. I knew what the "mode" needed to be, and the main
character's voice just didn't fit, much to my frustration. I flopped
from first to third... didn't help, I thought about switching viewpoint
characters... but that wouldn't have worked from a technical viewpoint,
and finally I hit upon the technique of having a minor walk on bit-part
character narrate the story. At that point the "voice" clicked in and
felt right, and I joyfully re-wrote what I had already written and I'm
now 90 000 words along and almost finished the rough draft.
Out of curiousity, how is it that you are "in people's heads," if you
don't know who is telling the story yet? Can you know your POV before
you know your narrator? Or do you know the narrator, but just not what
he sounds like?
Until I started this one, everything I had done had been narrated by a
main character either in first person, or in tight-third. This was
different. I wasn't expecting it. I think that was why it took me so
long to figure out what I needed to do.
One of these years I'm going to need a voice that happens to be
omniscient, and it will take me forever to figure it out.
Michelle Bottorff
--
Family webpage: http://home.sprintmail.com/~mbottorff/index.html
Lady Lavender's Filksongs: http://www.freemars.org/lavender/index.html
27r:2a:1p
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
<%9oR7.175890$YD.13...@news2.aus1.giganews.com>,
je...@texas.net (Tony Jebson) wrote:
> May Gentle wrote:
> [snip]
> > Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> > story goes, they know the people in it, they know
>everything
> > they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
>
> [snip]
>
> > I don't think there's anything wrong with the story
>itself:
> > /it's/ not trite (as much as one can ever tell). I just
> > can't find the right tone, the right voice, maybe the
>right
> > narrator's attitude (which is different from the
>character's
> > attitude) towards what's happening.
>
> Hmm . . . maybe it's not the voice that is wrong but the
>choice of protagonist. You could experiment with this.
That's just about possible -- I've been convinced it's his
story for a long time, but maybe it's hers. Maybe. And
there really are only two POVs available, since character #3
doesn't turn up until quite late on...
OK: I'll have a go at some of it from her POV. And ponder a
restructure -- /no I won't!/ Sorry, I just got suckered into
the 'notes and revisions' swamp, and I've been in it too
often with this story. I shall /write/ a scene from #3's
POV. Thanks.
>
> Alternatively, maybe experimenting around some stupid
> questions would help:
> Is the narrator reliable or unreliable?
Reliable, if it's the chap I'm going with.
> How omniscient it the narrator?
Not at all, poor sod! :) You can trust every word he says,
but he's really struggling to get a grip on what's happening
-- apart from the immediate troubles that have dropped on him
from a great height, that is: he's very clear about those.
I do /have/ an omniscient character in the background, but I
really, really don't want to write from his point of view...
<thinks> Is this because it sounds like *work?* Yes!
</thinks>
But won't it screw up the dramatic tension?
> At what psychological distance is the narrator? Up close
>and personal or remote and detached?
Up close and personal.
> How does the voice of the narrator relate to the crisis
>and/or climax?
Gah. He /is/ the climax. She's the penultimate climax, but
he is a spectator to that. Unless there's actually a climax
after the climax...
Okay, so I don't know _everything_ about the story. The
ending is a little fluid, as yet. <g>
> Anyway, what am I doing? You're a Published Author, I've
>never written a bit of fiction in my life and I'm giving you
>advice ;-)
>
> OK, I lied, I'm trying to write something but think naive
>neophyte.
All this stuff about Published Authors makes me
uncomfortable, to tell you the truth. I tend to the
self-conscious anyway, and I don't want to quail at asking
questions here! But I know that wasn't your intention.
I suppose my view is that we all hit the same problems, we
just don't hit them in the same order, so it's very helpful
for everybody to give advice to everybody else.
There /are/ people who are a waste of oxygen, but this only
becomes apparent in practise. <g>
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
> > turn up? Or should I go back to making stabs at
>different
> > options in the hope something clicks?
>
> You could try first-person with several different
>characters as the narrator, and see if any one of them
>approaches the needed voice. Then you can step back and go
>third-person narrator (if you want) keeping the same tone?
Not sure how I'd keep the same tone... but apart from that:
yes. I ought to have a trip around the characters. Thank
you.
Some part of my mind keeps insisting that this is a waste of
time, I should just write the goddamn story already. (My
internalised Editor is a _real_ bitch!)
However, given the amount of time I've spent kicking this
story around, while getting on with other projects, I
probably shouldn't worry about spending more time on this
experiment.
> With first person you can commit to paper things you'd be
>dead ashamed of been seen writing as third person narrator.
Now that's interesting. It *might* work the other way around
for me -- third person is dispassionate enough that I can
commit any number of potentially embarrassing things to
paper.
Which may be why I keep wanting the bulk of this story to be
in 3rd. He has a lot of embarrassing things headed his way.
And painful. And upsetting. And funny, too; I hasten to
add, in case you think I have no sympathy for him. <g>
Oh, that and the fact that when I *did* try him in 1st, it
worked, but didn't fit the story.
:-/
>I think (I've never
> tried, I'm not very good at doing voices, my several
>first-persons narrators that I used to use when I was a kid
>all sounded just the same). (Well, I'm thinking of Brust's
>Khaavren novels right now).
Been a long time since I read any Brust. I must have a
rummage through the boxes and see what I can unearth. Thanks
for the hint.
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> In article <9v4mg0$gh8$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk>,
> mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> writes:
>
> >Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
> >turn up?
>
> Try picking somebody and doing it first-person. Then the
>narrative voice has to be the same as the character's voice.
> If the story screams and yells, you ignore it until it
>starts telling you "Not like that! Like *this*!", at which
> point you've got it.
That's the one thing I actually have tried, and it was a
bust. A strange one, actually -- the scene in #1's
first-person POV is fine, nothing wrong with it, it just
doesn't _fit._
Thanks for the prod. Given what you say, I should probably
have a go with #2's and #3's viewpoints in first person, and
see if any of /that/ will make the story kick and yell and
give?
So far, the only thing screaming and yelling is me... <g>
On a secondary point: I'm not absolutely sure that the
character's voice and the story's voice are the same thing
(no matter what POV we're in), but I can't explain properly
what I mean by that... Let me try:
There's something that gives you the way the /narrative/
describes things/events, which is not the same as the
character's speaking voice, or the character's internal
musings. (Not necessarily the same, anyway.) That's what I
mean when I say narrative voice, and it occurs to me now that
other people may not make the same distinction. Oh.
Unless what I'm doing is omniscient viewpoint but only
focusing on one character -- no, that can't be right...
Would you have any ideas for anything I could try that
wouldn't be POV-related?
> Or you start by coming up with four or five slightly
>different voices that you *could* use, theoretically, and
>then try to decide which of them feels closest,
> and try to develop something workable out of that.
Wah! Whoa! Back up!
;-)
Since this is Not The Way I Do Things, could you go through
that in a bit more detail? What sort of four or five
different voices? How would they differ from each other?
I've been rather organic in this matter, previously. There's
been The Voice, and as soon as I get the first line of a
story, I know the Voice is in my head. I can tell if it goes
off into false notes. I don't have a category that isn't
'this works' or 'shite'.
I'm willing to develop one, however.
>If you have enough false starts, maybe you could use those
>-- if any of them seemed closer than the
> others, can you figure out *why* it was closer?
Some things I'm shamefully non-rational about. Or
non-analytical. Maybe I should go back and look at the false
starts I do have, and see what I can work out about them.
Unfortunately, that means /looking/ at them...
Feel free to imagine me holding something smelly and dripping
by the tip of thumb and index finger, here. That'll give you
the tone of *that* voice. :-)
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
<2001121113...@sdn-ar-001ohsharp248.dialsprint.net>,
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> > story goes, they know the people in it, they know
>everything
> > they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
> >
> > Narrative voice, I mean. Conversations aren't a problem.
> > Inside the people's heads isn't a problem.
>
> The one I'm working on now was like this.
>
> I started in the protagonists voice, and it didn't work,
>didn't work, didn't work. I knew what the "mode" needed to
>be, and the main character's voice just didn't fit, much to
>my frustration. I flopped from first to third... didn't
>help, I thought about switching viewpoint characters... but
>that wouldn't have worked from a technical viewpoint,
::sympathy::
> and finally I hit upon the technique of having a minor walk
>on bit-part character narrate the story. At that point the
>"voice" clicked in and felt right, and I joyfully re-wrote
>what I had already written and I'm now 90 000 words along
>and almost finished the rough draft.
Oh, well done! Isn't that click wonderful?
I don't think I have a minor character who could be on-stage
with #1 and #2 all the time, but I might use that as an
exercise, and do one scene from a minor character's POV.
Thanks. It might point me at something.
>
> Out of curiousity, how is it that you are "in people's
>heads," if you don't know who is telling the story yet? Can
>you know your POV before you know your narrator? Or do you
>know the narrator, but just not what he sounds like?
Ah.
This is another "Doesn't Everybody...?", isn't it? <g>
I'm frequently inside the people's heads before I know who's
telling the actual story -- that's how come I have a choice
of whose POV to tell the story from. I go over just sit
behind their eyes for a while and see how it feels for them.
Sometimes I've had the POV's voice without knowing properly
who they are, yet. That doesn't bother me; I can just follow
the voice.
And I know what the narrator -- I remain fairly sure he /is/
the narrator -- sounds like. Desperate, most of the time;
but then, he should never have signed up for this story. <g>
I know him as well as I know other real people. Which may be
part of the problem. It feels like presumption to tell his
story, when it should be his business to tell it. This is
*way* up one end of the author-separation-from-character
scale, as far as I'm concerned
When I inquired how he'd tell it, he plainly wouldn't, and
when I got him to write it, the tone didn't fit the story.
Or any story I could imagine, frankly.
> Until I started this one, everything I had done had been
>narrated by a main character either in first person, or in
>tight-third. This was different. I wasn't expecting it.
>I think that was why it took me so long to figure out what I
>needed to do.
>
> One of these years I'm going to need a voice that happens
>to be omniscient, and it will take me forever to figure it
>out.
Short-circuit it by deliberately doing one right now. <g>
Mary
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> Some things I'm shamefully non-rational about. Or
> non-analytical. Maybe I should go back and look at the false
> starts I do have, and see what I can work out about them.
> Unfortunately, that means /looking/ at them...
>
> Feel free to imagine me holding something smelly and dripping
> by the tip of thumb and index finger, here. That'll give you
> the tone of *that* voice. :-)
That's what I feel when I look at one of the dissertations my
professor's given me as background. It's a good thing for me because I
tell myself "Now whatever I do can't be worse than _that_, can it?" It's
trickier, but not impossible, to do it with something you've done
youself.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> All this stuff about Published Authors makes me
> uncomfortable, to tell you the truth. I tend to the
> self-conscious anyway, and I don't want to quail at asking
> questions here! But I know that wasn't your intention.
Just _wait_ until I write on my business card "Advised Mary Gentle on
writing". :-))
Jo Walton
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
> There's something that gives you the way the /narrative/
> describes things/events, which is not the same as the
> character's speaking voice, or the character's internal
> musings. (Not necessarily the same, anyway.) That's what I
> mean when I say narrative voice, and it occurs to me now that
> other people may not make the same distinction. Oh.
>
> Unless what I'm doing is omniscient viewpoint but only
> focusing on one character -- no, that can't be right...
>
> Would you have any ideas for anything I could try that
> wouldn't be POV-related?
Distance of narration? Involvement of narration? Angle of caring?
Perception of angle of percieved narration to percieved audience,
and real readers? Try the narrative voice very dry, and then very
intimate, and then very cold and then very enthusiastic, and see
what register it wants to be?
--
Jo J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk
I kissed a kif at Kefk
*THE KING'S NAME* out now from Tor!
Sample Chapters, Map, Poems, & stuff at http://www.bluejo.demon.co.uk
Patricia J. Hawkins
....
mg> I do /have/ an omniscient character in the background, but I
mg> really, really don't want to write from his point of view...
mg> <thinks> Is this because it sounds like *work?* Yes!
mg> </thinks>
mg> But won't it screw up the dramatic tension?
He may know all, but he could be really cagey about telling all. Or
just not thinking about it right now. Might be really fun [for a
sadistic author, bwahaha] -- tantalizing glimpses of what the
omniscient fellow knows, but isn't letting the reader see.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Patricia J. Hawkins
mg> On a secondary point: I'm not absolutely sure that the
mg> character's voice and the story's voice are the same thing
mg> (no matter what POV we're in), but I can't explain properly
mg> what I mean by that... Let me try:
mg> There's something that gives you the way the /narrative/
mg> describes things/events, which is not the same as the
mg> character's speaking voice, or the character's internal
mg> musings. (Not necessarily the same, anyway.) That's what I
mg> mean when I say narrative voice, and it occurs to me now that
mg> other people may not make the same distinction. Oh.
I wonder if you mean the way in which things are revealed, or the
???? philosophy of the overall shape of it all? A meta voice -- how
you decide how & when & what the POV character displays whatever?
mg> Unless what I'm doing is omniscient viewpoint but only
mg> focusing on one character -- no, that can't be right...
mg> Would you have any ideas for anything I could try that
mg> wouldn't be POV-related?
The only thing I can think of is to ask what's wrong with what
you've come up with so far. How is it wrong, where does it go wrong?
....
mg> Feel free to imagine me holding something smelly and dripping
mg> by the tip of thumb and index finger, here. That'll give you
mg> the tone of *that* voice. :-)
Yes, well, what does it smell _of_?
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Charlie Stross
as <je...@texas.net> declared:
> Anyway, what am I doing? You're a Published Author, I've never
> written a bit of fiction in my life and I'm giving you advice ;-)
So what?
One of the things you'll discover when you get published is that it's
like walking a mountain range: there's always a higher peak ahead of
you. Getting published, or getting nominated for awards, doesn't turn you
into a little tin god or confer some kind of mantle of infallability --
at least, it shouldn't if you've got a sense of proportion.
Another thing you'll discover is that you've got certain weaknesses,
and your successes are directly proportional to either your ability to
tap-dance around your weaknesses, or your ability to learn to confront
them. But when you're trying to get to grips with a personal weak spot,
you're right back at the beginning of that mountain range, in the foothills
again.
We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
-- Charlie
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk (Jo Walton) wrote:
> In article <9v5k7o$7c2$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk>
> mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
>
> > There's something that gives you the way the /narrative/
> > describes things/events, which is not the same as the
> > character's speaking voice, or the character's internal
> > musings. (Not necessarily the same, anyway.) That's
>what I
> > mean when I say narrative voice, and it occurs to me now
>that
> > other people may not make the same distinction. Oh.
> >
> > Unless what I'm doing is omniscient viewpoint but only
> > focusing on one character -- no, that can't be right...
> >
> > Would you have any ideas for anything I could try that
> > wouldn't be POV-related?
>
> Distance of narration? Involvement of narration? Angle of
>caring? Perception of angle of percieved narration to
>percieved audience, and real readers?
Wow, some of those make my brain hurt... :)
Thanks. At least, if I can't make this story work, I shall
end up knowing why, because this is really making me think!
I'm with you on distance and involvement, but 'angle of
caring'? Would that be if the implicit voice of the
_narrative_ cares about things differently to the way that
the principle character does? If that's right, I can cope
with analysing that.
Because, it occurs to me, thinking about that, there is a
severely sharp angle there, since the narration is straining
to be present-day, and person #1 is not like us, by half a
millennium. So now I wonder whether the narration *should*
be grounded in the here-and-now...
The last one I'm not at all sure I understand. Perceived
readers and real audience' seems to have something going for
it, though, as a concept to chew over. Maybe I need to
bounce something off my beta-reader... Though I doubt you
meant anything as mundane as that. :)
>Try the narrative
>voice very dry, and then very intimate, and then very cold
>and then very enthusiastic, and see what register it wants
>to be?
Those are useful; I'll try them. This is exactly what I
meant by coming in on a different approach: ta!
I'm thinking now that (after finishing up on my present
story), I'll have The Wasteland That Is Christmas free to
mess about with the problem story, and that'll be good,
because it'll feel less *driven* -- more of a holiday
relaxation. With a bit of luck. :)
Mary
"Bah -- Humbug!" (just practising...)
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > All this stuff about Published Authors makes me
> > uncomfortable, to tell you the truth. I tend to the
> > self-conscious anyway, and I don't want to quail at
>asking
> > questions here! But I know that wasn't your intention.
>
> Just _wait_ until I write on my business card "Advised Mary
>Gentle on writing". :-))
Grr. <g>
Bit of a two-edged sword, anyway, if the reviews say "bloody
hell, that one was crap!"
Mary
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Some things I'm shamefully non-rational about. Or
> > non-analytical. Maybe I should go back and look at the
>false
> > starts I do have, and see what I can work out about them.
> > Unfortunately, that means /looking/ at them...
> >
> > Feel free to imagine me holding something smelly and
>dripping
> > by the tip of thumb and index finger, here. That'll give
>you
> > the tone of *that* voice. :-)
>
> That's what I feel when I look at one of the dissertations
>my professor's given me as background. It's a good thing for
>me because I tell myself "Now whatever I do can't be worse
>than _that_, can it?" It's trickier, but not impossible, to
>do it with something you've done youself.
It *ought* to be possible, you're right. I've definitely
been inspired (if that's the word) in the past by thinking, I
can do better than _that._ Where 'that' is dreck, but
published dreck.
Maybe I'll pretend these first drafts are primary sources,
written by some other person, about the same events -- and
they evidently didn't know *anything* about their subject, so
I'll just have to put them right...
Hey, it's worth a try. :)
This is your Babbage dissertation, did I remember that right?
Mary
Marilee J. Layman
<cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like this
newsgroup.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
Mary K. Kuhner
<mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>I know him as well as I know other real people. Which may be
>part of the problem. It feels like presumption to tell his
>story, when it should be his business to tell it. This is
>*way* up one end of the author-separation-from-character
>scale, as far as I'm concerned
>When I inquired how he'd tell it, he plainly wouldn't, and
>when I got him to write it, the tone didn't fit the story.
>Or any story I could imagine, frankly.
Right. I've seen that one before. It is simply impertinent to
ask some characters to narrate--way too much "baring your
soul in public" about it for them.
There is a scene in one of Graydon's stories from the POV
of a house. Is it possible that something really stunt-like
could work for this story? Main character's guardian angel
or tempting demon? Piece of baggage? Or do you need
to step right away from this story and place it in a frame
tale so that the real narrator is a generation later, or a
thousand generations later, or of an alien species, or something?
I realize that POV isn't the only, or perhaps even the real,
problem here; you're not sure what angle to grab this story
from. But a weird narrative angle might possibly help.
Could you try writing some good one-line synopses of
what story this is--and then look for a tone and angle that
subverts them all? What would be a really wrongheaded
angle to approach a story like this from? Is there a way to
push all the obvious parts off center stage and have
something else come front and center?
Could you make the story illustrate a point, like a fable or
fairy story, except the point is culturally alien or wildly
weird?
Just brainstorming--I haven't a clue if any of this could help.
Mary Kuhner mkku...@eskimo.com
Dan Goodman
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk says...
> I don't think there's anything wrong with the story itself:
> /it's/ not trite (as much as one can ever tell). I just
> can't find the right tone, the right voice, maybe the right
> narrator's attitude (which is different from the character's
> attitude) towards what's happening.
>
> Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
> turn up? Or should I go back to making stabs at different
> options in the hope something clicks?
I don't know if this will help, but it might be worth a try:
deliberately do part of the story in what you're sure is the wrongest
possible voice, tone, and narrator's attitude. Like doing "Romeo and
Juliet" with the attitude that they deserved to die for betraying their
families, or _1984_ as told by someone to whom it has a happy ending.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Dan Goodman
cha...@nospam.antipope.org says...
Some sf/fantasy writers _do_ arrive at the heartwarming conclusion that
they've learned everything they have to -- and now all they need do is
write the same kind of story they've been successful with, for the rest
of their lives.
But I've noticed some of them complaining bitterly that the editors no
longer want the same kind of fiction they've been selling up till now.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Zeborah
> Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
> they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
>
> Narrative voice, I mean. Conversations aren't a problem.
> Inside the people's heads isn't a problem.
Oh, yes. My short story set in New Caledonia, based on a local myth as
told to me my some of my classes there. Could be very fun, but I don't
know the voice and/or the mode. I've made a few stabs at it; tried it
in diary form, and in more direct first person. It doesn't feel quite
right in third person.
Part of the problem may be that -- having been submerged in fanfic for
years -- I have this innate hatred of Mary Sue stories and anything that
smacks thereof (ie stories where the protag is just the author in
disguise; she usually then saves the universe and snags either Kirk or
Spock or whoever the author thinks is sexiest) and I've extended this
hatred far beyond where it should reach, so that it overlaps with simple
"write what you know" territory. So, since I was an assistant teacher
in NC who elicited this neat story from my students, my subconscious
refuses to let me write a story about someone who's an assistant teacher
in NC who elicits this neat story from her students. It's quite
annoying.
Zeborah
--
Semper ad eventum festinet. -- Horace
"Always party hard at social events." <eg>
http://www.geocities.com/zeborahnz2000
Tony Jebson
[snip]
> All this stuff about Published Authors makes me
> uncomfortable, to tell you the truth. I tend to the
> self-conscious anyway, and I don't want to quail at asking
> questions here! But I know that wasn't your intention.
Pah! Ask away, it's nice to know everyone has problems
now and again ;-)
Back to your voice problem . . . so, your narrator has a
modern outlook but is relating events around a 16th
century character in a up close and personal manner.
OK, let's clutch some hackneyed straws:
Does the POV character (sounds a bit like Casaubon
to me ;-) undergo a crisis that makes his outlook more
modern? You could then make it a retrospective kind
of narration "back then I didn't understand but" which
might also allow a bit of hindsight omniscience.
Alternatively, if you want to play with omniscience, he
could have a through-a-glass-darkly recollection of
some brush with your omniscient background
character.
Anyway, now that I'm shagged out after a good swim
it's time to return to the depths of the Europan ocean . . .
I mislaid a couple of characters down there in rather
a sticky situation. I know how they get out but that's not
the problem. In a story with 3 named characters (and
one of them a disembodied voice ;) I've only figured
out what makes the POV tick . . . the events seem to
come first in hard sci-fi.
[snip]
--- Tony Jebson
Dan Goodman
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk says...
> Because, it occurs to me, thinking about that, there is a
> severely sharp angle there, since the narration is straining
> to be present-day, and person #1 is not like us, by half a
> millennium. So now I wonder whether the narration *should*
> be grounded in the here-and-now...
A third possibility: the implied narrator is neither like us, or like
person #1. Someone partway between, for example.
Or someone from our future; from a time when -- oh, Princess Diana is
known to almost everyone only as the leader of the Wild Hunt.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Dan
>just not thinking about it right now. Might be really fun [for a
>sadistic author, bwahaha] -- tantalizing glimpses of what the
>omniscient fellow knows, but isn't letting the reader see.
>
Here are some ideas:
Omniscient but otherwise unreliable. Make this guy insane or retarded or just
have him lie to the reader. Also, you could try using a detached, Nick Carroway
type of narrator. I find this narration particularly helpful. While he doesn't
need to tell everything to the reader, his syntax, word choice, etc. can
suggest a good deal of back story or interpretation.
-Dan
Pamela Dean Dyer-Bennet
>Stoned koala bears drooled eucalyptus spittle in awe
>as <je...@texas.net> declared:
>> Anyway, what am I doing? You're a Published Author, I've never
>> written a bit of fiction in my life and I'm giving you advice ;-)
>So what?
Hear him, hear him!
>One of the things you'll discover when you get published is that it's
>like walking a mountain range: there's always a higher peak ahead of
>you. Getting published, or getting nominated for awards, doesn't turn you
>into a little tin god or confer some kind of mantle of infallability --
>at least, it shouldn't if you've got a sense of proportion.
>Another thing you'll discover is that you've got certain weaknesses,
>and your successes are directly proportional to either your ability to
>tap-dance around your weaknesses, or your ability to learn to confront
>them. But when you're trying to get to grips with a personal weak spot,
>you're right back at the beginning of that mountain range, in the foothills
>again.
Yes, yes, yes. What you said.
>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
I certainly hope so.
--
Pamela Dean Dyer-Bennet (pd...@demesne.com)
"I will open my heart to a blank page
and interview the witnesses." John M. Ford, "Shared World"
Lucy Kemnitzer
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>I may have a problem with a story I have in mind, a few
>projects down the line. I dunno. At the moment it's more a
>cloud on the horizon, the size of a man's hand... And since
>it's the first time I've hit this particular difficulty, I
>thought I'd ask how other people do it. You never know what
>generally useful stuff might turn up. <g>
>
>Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
>story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
>they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
>
>Narrative voice, I mean. Conversations aren't a problem.
>Inside the people's heads isn't a problem.
>
>I've had a couple of false starts (hence, back on back
>burner). I've re-read what I've written, each time, and
>thought 'Bleeding hell, girl, why don't you get a job as a
>road-sweeper? That would be of /much/ more use to the world
>than this trite load of old cobblers'.[1]
>
>I don't think there's anything wrong with the story itself:
>/it's/ not trite (as much as one can ever tell). I just
>can't find the right tone, the right voice, maybe the right
>narrator's attitude (which is different from the character's
>attitude) towards what's happening.
>
>Anyone have any ways for _encouraging_ the right voice to
>turn up? Or should I go back to making stabs at different
>options in the hope something clicks?
>
>I may steal the trick from the novel-in-November folks I've
>seen here, and just try to bash out something (anything!)
>without reading back while I'm doing it. This didn't do too
>well for the false starts, though. So...
>
>Mary
>
>
>[1] No offense intended to road-sweepers. It used to be
>possible to get temporary summer road-sweeper jobs when I
>lived on the south coast, and being suntanned brown and out
>of doors all day did appeal to me. Instead, I ended up
>getting a part-time job cleaning toilets in a girls' school.
><shudder>
>
Yes, well, we do end up doing some awful things to get along, don't
we?
Anyway, I tried responding to your reply to Jo, because I think Jo is
on to the thing, as usual. But I ended up just saying "yes, yes" and
I think in order to add anything I have to back up a ways.
You know how the character sees and feels and thinks and talks, right?
But the problem is that you don't know how the tale is told. I think,
from reading down the thread, that you're actually reaching for a
dissonance between the character's perceptions and expression, and the
perceptions that are expressed, and the style in which they are
expressed, in the story. And I think that the problem can be reduced
to the unreliable narrator problem even though I don't think that's
exactly what you're talking about. I mean, I think the approach to
writing this disjunct is similar, in practice. The way you have to
think about things is, anyway. I think.
One thing that is going on when we write is that even when we write
very closely from a particular character's point of view, we are still
really being observers who are capturing and presenting the
character's point of view. What am I speaking of, um, yes: the
Heisenberg principle, right?
I think when we write the unreliable narrator, we exploit this, by
slipping in information that the narrator either doesn't understand
the significance of or attempts to conceal the significance of. --
but the fact that the true observer, the writer, knows it and intends
to present it alters the voice of the unreliable narrator.
So, if you have a character whos point of view you are writing
through, and you're detecting a disjunct between that character's
actual proper voice and the voice of the story itself, I think you're
being pulled towards doing this same thing, only with angles of
perception and caring and emotion and expression, instead of with
points of data.
As if the unreliable narrator sort of story is plane geometry, and
this is solid geometry. It's the same math, but more layers of it.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Jo Walton
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
> In article <100810...@bluejo.demon.co.uk>,
> J...@bluejo.demon.co.uk (Jo Walton) wrote:
>
> > Distance of narration? Involvement of narration? Angle of
> >caring? Perception of angle of percieved narration to
> >percieved audience, and real readers?
>
> Wow, some of those make my brain hurt... :)
>
> Thanks. At least, if I can't make this story work, I shall
> end up knowing why, because this is really making me think!
>
> I'm with you on distance and involvement, but 'angle of
> caring'? Would that be if the implicit voice of the
> _narrative_ cares about things differently to the way that
> the principle character does? If that's right, I can cope
> with analysing that.
Yes. And also how much. I think of it as an angle in both degree and
direction.
> Because, it occurs to me, thinking about that, there is a
> severely sharp angle there, since the narration is straining
> to be present-day, and person #1 is not like us, by half a
> millennium. So now I wonder whether the narration *should*
> be grounded in the here-and-now...
There's the amount of things the narration can take for granted, too.
> The last one I'm not at all sure I understand. Perceived
> readers and real audience' seems to have something going for
> it, though, as a concept to chew over. Maybe I need to
> bounce something off my beta-reader... Though I doubt you
> meant anything as mundane as that. :)
What I meant was a story has a real author, you, and real readers, and
you can do things with the interaction there. (For instance, you can
decide you're going to make it all clear as day to six year olds, or you
can assume you're writing to an audience who have all read _Paradise Lost_.)
It also has another level in which the narrative voice is telling a story
and interacting with a percieved audience, and the percieved audience
have concerns as well. Frex if you were telling a story that purports to
be history in the context of the narration, and you stop to say "And from
that beginning came the vast Quelt trade that enriched our people and
then impoverished them and left us where we are today". To the real reader,
this is news and a tack connecting the frame story to the told story, but
to the percieved reader this is a platitude, and the voice of the story
is one who will stop to hammer down platitudes, giving the real reader
information.
I do hope this makes sense, because it's ten to eight and I'm going to
have to stop.
David Goldfarb
Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:13:51 +0000, Charlie Stross
><cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
>
>>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
>
>Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like this
>newsgroup.
AOL. (I tend to consider this group a slightly skewed extension
of rasseff.)
--
David Goldfarb <*>|"That's what the dragon *wants* you to think!
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | He doesn't want you to know he exists!"
| "Actually, I just want her to think you're nuts."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |"Oh, shut up." -- _Bone_ #3
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk
gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (David Goldfarb) wrote:
> In article <47cd1ug3id4illae4...@4ax.com>,
> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
> >On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:13:51 +0000, Charlie Stross
> ><cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
> >
> >>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
> >
> >Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like
>this
> >newsgroup.
>
> AOL. (I tend to consider this group a slightly skewed
>extension of rasseff.)
Skewed? How dare you call us...
You know, you have a point, there.
Mary
Chris Dollin
mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
> In article
> <%9oR7.175890$YD.13...@news2.aus1.giganews.com>,
> je...@texas.net (Tony Jebson) wrote:
>
>> How omniscient it the narrator?
>
> Not at all, poor sod! :) You can trust every word he says,
> but he's really struggling to get a grip on what's happening
> -- apart from the immediate troubles that have dropped on him
> from a great height, that is: he's very clear about those.
>
> I do /have/ an omniscient character in the background, but I
I have a sketch, a glimmer, of a character (and the odd scene or two)
who is, sort of, omniscient. I want to write his story, but it's
going to be difficult .... and I have to finish nine-and-sixty other
things first. But it's a kind of plausible omniscience, plausible
in narrative terms I mean.
(He only knows everything he *can* know, and it takes work to know
it in such a way that he can understand it. Since the background
is sort-of now, he would be a valuable resource for any organisation ...)
--
Organised Crime Or Government Hedgehog
Patricia C. Wrede
writes:
>On a secondary point: I'm not absolutely sure that the
>character's voice and the story's voice are the same thing
>(no matter what POV we're in), but I can't explain properly
>what I mean by that... Let me try:
>
>There's something that gives you the way the /narrative/
>describes things/events, which is not the same as the
>character's speaking voice, or the character's internal
>musings.
OK -- but in first person, isn't that just another way of saying "when people
are describing Stuff, they don't sound the same as when they are talking to
themselves or other people"? I mean, as far as I can tell, when you're in
first person, it's...it's subtle variations on a theme. It's still the
narrator's voice. In third person, you can have as much difference as you
want, because the narrative doesn't have to be consistent with any given
character's dialog.
>Would you have any ideas for anything I could try that
>wouldn't be POV-related?
Well, the whole "voice" thing is something I have a little trouble getting a
grip on, unless it's connected to characters. So I tend to think in terms of
stuff like "write from a different character's viewpoint" or "use first-person
instead of third" or "make up the narrator-character who's telling the story,
like Paarfi only never explicitly named and presented." So I'll have to think
about it and get back to you.
>> Or you start by coming up with four or five slightly
>>different voices that you *could* use, theoretically, and
>>then try to decide which of them feels closest,
>> and try to develop something workable out of that.
>Since this is Not The Way I Do Things, could you go through
>that in a bit more detail? What sort of four or five
>different voices? How would they differ from each other?
How do the ones you've tried differ from each other?
As I said, I don't have a terribly solid grip on the whole concept of "voice"
and how it works, so for me, this kind of thing involves basically messing
around with stylistic stuff until something clicks, because the voice (again,
for me) seems to follow along behind style changes, kicking and screaming.
So one way I'd approach this would be to look for some different...I don't know
what you'd call them, styles, voices, patterns, different ways of presenting
the narrative. Being analytical, I tend to start with obvious and quantifiable
stuff: things like, writing two paragraphs where the narrator doesn't use any
words that are more than two syllables, and then two where she uses at least
four four-syllable words per sentence, and maybe one with more simple sentences
and then one with longer ones. Or one that's very formal and stilted and
stuffy, and one that's very informal. I tend to go for extreme differences
because, as I said, I don't have a terribly good handle on this and extremes
are therefore easier for me to see differences in.
A much less extreme method is to consciously make up several characters who
*might* be telling the story to somebody -- a historian, a biographer, a
marketplace storyteller, a grandfather entertaining grandkids, etc. -- and then
give them personalities, and then see which one fits the way the story wants to
be told. But that gets back to characters and viewpoint, sort of (even though
the narrator "character" never officially appears in the book).
>I've been rather organic in this matter, previously. There's
>been The Voice, and as soon as I get the first line of a
>story, I know the Voice is in my head. I can tell if it goes
>off into false notes. I don't have a category that isn't
>'this works' or 'shite'.
Well, then, the real question is why didn't it work that way this time? Have
you not-gotten the first line yet? Or is it that this time, the Voice is
subtle enough that it's *hard* to tell when it's off? Or are you just trying
to push something in a direction when it isn't quite ready to move yet? Or
what?
>>If you have enough false starts, maybe you could use those
>>-- if any of them seemed closer than the
>> others, can you figure out *why* it was closer?
>
>Some things I'm shamefully non-rational about. Or
>non-analytical.
By preference, or by necessity? If this is one of those process things where
you *can't* get analytical without messing everything up, then you oughtn't to
try. But if it's just a dislike of that sort of mess...well, I don't know
about you, but just about the time that I notice I'm doing something like that,
my backbrain tends to present me with a situation where I *have* to wade into
the mess and sort it out if I want to get anything done ever again.
> Maybe I should go back and look at the false
>starts I do have, and see what I can work out about them.
>Unfortunately, that means /looking/ at them...
Well, yeah, probably. Unless you've got a good enough memory to be able to
pull out almost-worked bits *without* looking back.
Patricia C. Wrede
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> This is your Babbage dissertation, did I remember that right?
>
> Mary
Yes. I want all of the commas in the text my professor's given me to die
a painful and prolonged death. I'm very dubious about some of the
concepts put forward in the introduction as well, but I'd hate them to
be the darlings of my professor.
I do doubt the wisdom of writing "The French mathematician and
philosopher Blaise Pascal", when you're writing your dissertation. It's
going to be read (well, not read, actually) by a panel of philosphy
professors. They're supposed to know who Pascal was. And I find it
especially stupid to _repeat_ it in the next page, in case they've
forgotten who this Pascal chap was.
Dissertations in Italy are supposed to be an original contribution to
the field one's supposed to graduate in. Worked great when graduates
were few and far between, is a lot more difficult now. Lots of people
complete their exam course (as I did) and never graduate because they
are cowed by the prospect of writing up a dissertation. I spent five
years in fear and terror of this task, and it's not over yet, so I don't
blame my colleague for having concocted 160 pages of dissertation any
way she could. (I also don't want to bash her on a public newsgroup too
much. She actually did her homework, read all the required stuff and
tried to explain it, and her dissertation _is_ going to help me). And,
truly, I don't think I've got the technical expertise to say something
new, fresh and original about Babbage. My thesis is supposed to be a
phylosophy one, but you can hardly say you're mastering an author when
you can't follow his mathematics. So, my contribution probably won't be
remembered down the ages. What happens then is that people lift whole
passages from various books, sew them toghether so that the stiches
aren't showing too much, and then print up the result and bind it.
I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
I asked my professor what was wrong with the dissertation. He made a
moue and said: "Well, it doesn't give any idea of the fascination of the
man". I can relate to this. I'm not much of a researcher and I have
gaping holes in my knowledge of the intricacies of computation, machine
intelligence, artificial intelligence, and so on. But I _can_ write
winningly. It's the one thing I can do. Now it all remains to find out
what to write. Piece of cake.
* There was a booklet by Umberto Eco about "How to write a graduation
dissertation". It was a huge success when it came out - Eco's first
money-earner, long before the Rose - and it's been a long-seller ever
since. It's an incredibly wise and down-to-earth guide on how to write a
scholarly paper, enjoyable even by somebody who doesn't have to face
this dreadful thing. Among other things he warns aspiring graduates to
avoid subjects that will swallow you whole - many titles turn into, he
said, "Brief notes on the Universe". I already fell into this once.
Edward John Schoenfeld
> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
> I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
> being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
> this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
(was). One might *insert* a phrase offset by commas *between* the subject
and verb, as in "Ada Lovelace, a countess, was one of the first
computational scientists."
I suppose it might be made to work in German, but I cannot imagine any self
respecting German academic inserting a pause of any kind after a phrase that
short. :-) In any case, a German Satz still requires at least one verb
(i.e. in your example the comma would come after the 'was') though more are
preferred. But then, I have read several recent academic works in German
written in the active voice, so even this is changing.
If that sort of arcane style is still required in Italian dissertations, you
have my deepest sympathy.
Ed
Patricia C. Wrede
<dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>Some sf/fantasy writers _do_ arrive at the heartwarming conclusion that
>they've learned everything they have to -- and now all they need do is
>write the same kind of story they've been successful with, for the rest
>of their lives.
Oh, please, Dan, don't limit it to just SF/F writers! Heck, you don't even
have to limit it to writers, if you change it from "write the same kind of
story" to "do the same things." They are the sort of people I most often want
to whack upside the head. Several times. With a very large two-by-four.
Patricia C. Wrede
Patricia C. Wrede
Stross <cha...@nospam.antipope.org> writes:
>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
That, or some reasonable facsimilie, I hope -- I think some people are here as
much for the entertainment as anything. (Where else do you get
a...serious?...discussion of the orbital mechanics of an elastic spherical
cow?) But one of the things I like best about this group is that we talk about
writing without very much in the way of Deferring To The Published.
Oh, and by the way, and totally at angles to the topic -- remember that crabby
guy in my head who wouldn't tell me anything? I think I finally figured out
what he's been hiding, and I don't know that I much blame him, but boy, am I
going to have fun when *he* comes up in the queue...
Patricia C. Wrede
Patricia C. Wrede
zeb...@altavista.com (Zeborah) writes:
>So, since I was an assistant teacher
>in NC who elicited this neat story from my students, my subconscious
>refuses to let me write a story about someone who's an assistant teacher
>in NC who elicits this neat story from her students. It's quite
>annoying.
It would be.
Sound like you need some variation of Dealing With The Inner Critic Who Won't
Let You Do Anything That Isn't Absolutely Perfect. The thing that springs most
readily to mind is giving yourself permission to write badly...or, in this
case, giving yourself permission to write a Mary Sue story. You tell yourself
that this is something you are doing for pure fun, to exorcise all the Mary Sue
demons, and you are by gum going to *wallow* in its Mary Sue-ness -- that's the
whole point.
Alternatively, you could try convincing yourself that it isn't a Mary Sue at
all -- it's pretentious autobiographical literary fiction of the most utterly
respectable sort. If you despise pretentious autobiographical literary
fiction, you may even be able to combine the two techniques -- convince
yourself that you are writing a Mary Sue *disguised* as pretentious
autobiographical literary fiction, and spend as much of your writing time as
possible chortling about how you are putting one over on the PALF crowd by
foisting a Mary Sue onto them.
And in any case, I'm not at all sure that there's anything particularly wrong
with Mary Sue's, per se. They're like the "...and his name was Adam, and hers
was Eve!" stories -- it's a pattern that's been overused in some contexts, but
put it into a different context, or find something new to do with it, and it
can work perfectly well.
Patricia C. Wrede
Jo Walton
mjla...@erols.com "Marilee J. Layman" writes:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:13:51 +0000, Charlie Stross
> <cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
>
> >We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
>
> Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like this
> newsgroup.
Which is fine, but I think people here for that purpose should bear in
mind it's important not to do that to the detriment of the purpose of the
group. Otherwise there won't be a newsgroup here to like, there'll just
be more rasseff. I'd hate to see what happened to rasfw happen here.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> > From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
> > I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
> > being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
> > this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
> > between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
> > computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
> > that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
> > me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
>
>
> I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
> subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
> (was). One might *insert* a phrase offset by commas *between* the subject
> and verb, as in "Ada Lovelace, a countess, was one of the first
> computational scientists."
>
Actually, there are two common mistakes with the comma in Italian: one
is separating the subject from a verb, and the other is separating the
proposition supporting (wrong verb I know but I don't know the right
one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For example: "I
have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I think the comma
in this case must be used in German. I'm not sure about English but it
gives me the creeps to read it anyway, every time. The first one, of
course, is obviously a mistake in all languages.
> I suppose it might be made to work in German, but I cannot imagine any self
> respecting German academic inserting a pause of any kind after a phrase that
> short. :-) In any case, a German Satz still requires at least one verb
> (i.e. in your example the comma would come after the 'was') though more are
> preferred. But then, I have read several recent academic works in German
> written in the active voice, so even this is changing.
> If that sort of arcane style is still required in Italian dissertations, you
> have my deepest sympathy.
This is no arcane style: it's simply a very bad one. I'm not required to
write in this style, as a matter of fact people would cheer and whistle
if I didn't. It's just that university professors are way overworked to
be able to correct the writing style of their students' dissertations as
well.
Jaana Heino
> one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For example: "I
> have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I think the comma
> in this case must be used in German.
I believe it's German usage, too. It's also Finnish usage...
I know how to use commas in Finnish, and it's all simple and
understandable for me. It's English commas that make me crazy. I just
cannot get them right with intuition, no matter how much I read English
and how much I study the rules. I always have to go through every bloody
sentence with the exact purpose of checking the bloody commas. Sorry
about my language, but it really is a pain.
--
Jaana Heino "Power corrupts, but we
ja...@iki.fi still need electricity."
Margaret Young
Dan) wrote:
<snip discussion of the joys and horrors of writing a dissertation>
I found writing my dissertation to be one of the most painful
experiences of my life. I knew the material but had to go through the
process of explaining it to a group of people who didn't always agree
with me. So I had to painfully PROVE things in gory detail because I
was calling an observed and accepted wisdom (the use of a particular
index) into question.
At some distance I realize that I love the damn subject inside out [1]
and writing about it part was wrenching because _I had definite
feelings_ about it and I didn't want to go through all the academic
niceties in order to prove that I was indeed an expert on it.
In short, it is a painful experience but worth it. (And by the way in
the US [at least in my field] you are also expected to add something
new to your field.
[1] Yes, it is possible to be passionate about statistical indices.
Not, however, a passion shared by all the members of my committee I
suspect.
Margaret
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come the apocalypse there will be cockroaches, Keith Richards and the
faint smell of cat pee.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
Check out our new Unlimited Server. No Download or Time Limits!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! ==-----
Margaret Young
>Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> wrote:
>> one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For example: "I
>> have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I think the comma
>> in this case must be used in German.
>
>I believe it's German usage, too. It's also Finnish usage...
>
>I know how to use commas in Finnish, and it's all simple and
>understandable for me. It's English commas that make me crazy. I just
>cannot get them right with intuition, no matter how much I read English
>and how much I study the rules. I always have to go through every bloody
>sentence with the exact purpose of checking the bloody commas. Sorry
>about my language, but it really is a pain.
Don't feel bad -- most of my students (born to the English language)
have no idea of when (and when not) to use commas. They also don't
know how to use semicolons correctly -- but use (and therefore misuse)
the latter less often than the former.
Mare Kuntz
Dan) wrote:
>* There was a booklet by Umberto Eco about "How to write a graduation
>dissertation". It was a huge success when it came out - Eco's first
>money-earner, long before the Rose - and it's been a long-seller ever
>since. It's an incredibly wise and down-to-earth guide on how to write a
>scholarly paper, enjoyable even by somebody who doesn't have to face
>this dreadful thing. Among other things he warns aspiring graduates to
>avoid subjects that will swallow you whole - many titles turn into, he
>said, "Brief notes on the Universe". I already fell into this once.
Alas, that advice comes too late for me - I'm already thirty pages
into writing a structuralist anatomy and physiology of fiction. Yes,
_all_ fiction. Possible Title: _Fiction Is As Fiction Does_. And
this is supposedly a thesis, not a dissertation. I realize this is
stupid and perhaps impossible, not to mention egotistical of me to
presume I know enough to write it, but I'm having fun writing it.
-Mare
Irina Rempt
> Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> wrote:
>> one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For
>> example: "I have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I
>> think the comma in this case must be used in German.
>
> I believe it's German usage, too. It's also Finnish usage...
And Dutch usage, though there's a catch: you only use the comma when
the relative clause expands on what came before (and you can leave it
out without causing ambiguity), not when it defines it. Many people
get it wrong. Almost as many people think they know better than the
people who *do* get it right.
Example:
Mijn zus die in Amsterdam woont is getrouwd.
"My sister who lives in Amsterdam got married."
(with optionally a comma after "woont" but never after "zus")
This implies that the speaker[1] has at least one more sister, who
doesn't live in Amsterdam and didn't get married either.
Mijn zus, die in Amsterdam woont, is getrouwd.
"My sister, who lives in Amsterdam, got married."
This implies that the speaker has just the one sister who,
incidentally, lives in Amsterdam.
[1] Or rather the writer: this is purely written language.
I've just noticed that it works in English as well.
Irina
--
ir...@valdyas.org
http://www.valdyas.org/irina/index.html (English)
http://www.valdyas.org/irina/backpage.html (Nederlands)
Jaana Heino
> On 12 Dec 2001 18:18:35 GMT, Jaana Heino <ja...@iki.fi> wrote:
>>I know how to use commas in Finnish, and it's all simple and
>>understandable for me. It's English commas that make me crazy. I just
>>cannot get them right with intuition, no matter how much I read English
>>and how much I study the rules. I always have to go through every bloody
>>sentence with the exact purpose of checking the bloody commas. Sorry
>>about my language, but it really is a pain.
>
> Don't feel bad -- most of my students (born to the English language)
> have no idea of when (and when not) to use commas. They also don't
> know how to use semicolons correctly -- but use (and therefore misuse)
> the latter less often than the former.
Oh, I only feel bad about it when I actually have to do it. Which is,
generally, before I send my poor stories to torment yet another editor.
:) When writing drafts, etc, I don't give a damn.
Jonathan L Cunningham
[on commas]
On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:21:00 -0600, Edward John Schoenfeld
<ejscho...@mindspring.com> said:
>> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
(snip)>> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
>> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
>> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
>> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
>
>I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
>subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
>(was). One might *insert* a phrase offset by commas *between* the subject
>and verb, as in "Ada Lovelace, a countess, was one of the first
>computational scientists."
As a rule of thumb, commas are supposed to come in pairs. They are
like small pairs of parentheses - if you can't replace them by
parentheses (and then delete the whole expression) without making
what is left ungrammatical, you've got them wrong.
Both sentences in my previous paragraph are wrong by this definition.
Edward's (Ed's?) example shows correct use of commas.
So why are mine wrong? Firstly, I sprinkle commas around like someone
sprinkling salt on food before tasting it (autocondimentation - nice
word that :-).
Secondly, I think it is ok to match a comma with an imaginary comma
at the beginning or end of the sentence. So "As a rule of thumb" can
be treated as a paranthetical expression and deleted. In the second
sentence, the solitary comma is standing in for a missing "then" i.e.
it represent the pause which I would make in speaking because I don't
usually say the "then". It's definitely breaking the rules but I
can't think of a better way to punctuate it. If I (correctly) omit
the comma then it makes the sentence harder to read (IMO) and I'm
not usually willing, as in this sentence, to use "then" instead of
inserting a comma.
So my first sentence is probably ok and the second probably isn't.
--
Jonathan L Cunningham
Jaana Heino
> And Dutch usage, though there's a catch: you only use the comma when
> the relative clause expands on what came before (and you can leave it
> out without causing ambiguity), not when it defines it.
> I've just noticed that it works in English as well.
It's one of the rules that various grammar books try to tell me, yes.
In Finnish you learn this matnra of connectives in school: "että jotta
koska kun jos vaikka kuin kunnes ja sekä eli tai vai mutta vaan" ("that,
therefore, because, when, if, even though, like, until", etc, cannot
translate the rest so that I can capture the difference between the two
ands and two likes and two ors). And then you learn the rules to go with
each. And the exceptions to those rules. And the exceptions to the
exceptions. And after that, it really is very simple.
Hmh. I don't sound convincing. Must be the mulled wine.
Irina Rempt
> In Finnish you learn this matnra of connectives in school: "että
> jotta koska kun jos vaikka kuin kunnes ja sekä eli tai vai mutta
> vaan" ("that, therefore, because, when, if, even though, like,
> until", etc, cannot translate the rest so that I can capture the
> difference between the two ands and two likes and two ors).
Ooh, I love Finnish :-)
Lori Selke
<mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
>story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
>they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
Yes.
I wish I could tell you how I solved it. I had a partial
first draft that I was slogging through. I abandoned
it and brooded. I read a story by another author and
went "yes! more like that!", took some rapid and
sketchy notes, and then sat on it for another little
while. Then I started from scratch, and I had the voice.
It was altogether weird.
Lori
--
se...@io.com, se...@mindspring.com, http://www.io.com/~selk
"But this isn't a dance! It's upright delirium!" -- The Desert Peach
Chris Dollin
sunand...@excite.com (Mare Kuntz) writes:
>
> Alas, that advice comes too late for me - I'm already thirty pages
> into writing a structuralist anatomy and physiology of fiction. Yes,
> _all_ fiction. Possible Title: _Fiction Is As Fiction Does_. And
> this is supposedly a thesis, not a dissertation. I realize this is
> stupid and perhaps impossible, not to mention egotistical of me to
> presume I know enough to write it, but I'm having fun writing it.
You might then be interested in Nick Lowe's _The Classical Plot and
the Invention of Western Narrative_. It's made me add _The Illiad_
and _The Odyssey_ to my buying list.
Disclaimer: I knew Nick, a long time ago in a university far far away,
and his book was recommended to me by a mutual friend.
--
para-Jomsborg Hedgehog
C FAQ's at: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/by-newsgroup/comp/comp.lang.c.html
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> wrote:
> > one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For example: "I
> > have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I think the comma
> > in this case must be used in German.
>
> I believe it's German usage, too. It's also Finnish usage...
It's strange - my inner ear just screams and screams for the comma after
the relative clause... but not when I read in German. Ok, I don't do it
much. But I cad adjust to it, just as I can adjust to the use of
excalmation points! Well, almost adjust!
And yet, when I read in Italian this doesn't seem the formal kind of
mistake, it seems just viscerally _wrong_.
Brian M. Scott
Dan) wrote:
[...]
>I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
>being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
>this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
>between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
>computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
>that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
>me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
You cannot do it in Leftpondian English. It appears to have attained
some level of acceptability in Rightpondian writing. I don't think
that you can do it in a straightforward translation of this sentence
into German.
[...]
Brian
Patricia J. Hawkins
AFDD> Actually, there are two common mistakes with the comma in Italian: one
AFDD> is separating the subject from a verb, and the other is separating the
AFDD> proposition supporting (wrong verb I know but I don't know the right
AFDD> one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For example: "I
AFDD> have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I think the comma
AFDD> in this case must be used in German. I'm not sure about English but it
AFDD> gives me the creeps to read it anyway, every time. The first one, of
AFDD> course, is obviously a mistake in all languages.
Your instincts are correct. It is a vile error in English, too.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Brian M. Scott
>> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
>> I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
>> being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
>> this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
>> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
>> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
>> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
>> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
>I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
>subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
>(was).
It's not uncommon in British writing when the subject is heavy (i.e.,
long or syntactically complex). I find it very confusing. (This has
come up a number of times in sci.lang.)
[...]
Brian
Brian M. Scott
wrote:
>Jaana Heino wrote:
>Example:
Yes, it's the distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive
relative clauses. I have been told by a U.S. editor that it is
increasingly *not* observed in the punctuation by British editors,
though it remains mandatory in U.S. writing. Note, though, that these
are different from Anna's example, in which the clause is actually
verb complement.
Brian
Patricia J. Hawkins
IR> Jaana Heino wrote:
>> Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> wrote:
>>> one) a relative clause from the relative clause itself. For
>>> example: "I have been told, that this is a very common mistake." I
>>> think the comma in this case must be used in German.
>>
>> I believe it's German usage, too. It's also Finnish usage...
IR> And Dutch usage, though there's a catch: you only use the comma when
IR> the relative clause expands on what came before (and you can leave it
IR> out without causing ambiguity), not when it defines it. Many people
IR> get it wrong. Almost as many people think they know better than the
IR> people who *do* get it right.
IR> Example:
IR> Mijn zus die in Amsterdam woont is getrouwd.
IR> "My sister who lives in Amsterdam got married."
IR> (with optionally a comma after "woont" but never after "zus")
IR> This implies that the speaker[1] has at least one more sister, who
IR> doesn't live in Amsterdam and didn't get married either.
IR> Mijn zus, die in Amsterdam woont, is getrouwd.
IR> "My sister, who lives in Amsterdam, got married."
IR> This implies that the speaker has just the one sister who,
IR> incidentally, lives in Amsterdam.
IR> [1] Or rather the writer: this is purely written language.
IR> I've just noticed that it works in English as well.
Not quite. You get either both commas, or neither:
My sister, who lives in Amsterdam, got married.
(One sister only.)
My sister who lives in Amsterdam got married.
(Ambiguous; may specify a particular sister out of several, may be
sloppy punctuation.)
If I wanted to be clear about it, I'd say:
My sister that lives in Amsterdam got married.
("that" serves to indicate one object out of many.)
or, more informally:
My sister -- the one who lives in Amsterdam -- got married.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Edward John Schoenfeld
> From: Jonathan....@tesco.net (Jonathan L Cunningham)
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.composition
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:52:53 GMT
> Subject: Re: On the writing of dissertations
>
>
> [on commas]
>
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:21:00 -0600, Edward John Schoenfeld
> <ejscho...@mindspring.com> said:
>
>>> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
> (snip)>> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
>>> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
>>> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
>>> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
>>
>> I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
>> subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
>> (was). One might *insert* a phrase offset by commas *between* the subject
>> and verb, as in "Ada Lovelace, a countess, was one of the first
>> computational scientists."
>
> As a rule of thumb, commas are supposed to come in pairs. They are
> like small pairs of parentheses - if you can't replace them by
> parentheses (and then delete the whole expression) without making
> what is left ungrammatical, you've got them wrong.
That (to offset parenthetical phrases) is ONE of the uses of commas in
English. There are others, but not so many as to prevent their being
learned with relative ease. The immediately previous sentence includes one:
the separation of two independent clauses in a compound sentence linked by a
conjunction such as and, but, or therefore. The immediately previous
sentence includes yet another use of commas, the separation of items in a
list. The immediately previous . . . (I have to stop now, before I turn
into The Anal Grammarian. Believe me, you don't even want to *think* about
this super-villain's costume, much less actually see it :-)
>
> Both sentences in my previous paragraph are wrong by this definition.
>
> Edward's (Ed's?) example shows correct use of commas.
>
> So why are mine wrong?
They aren't wrong. Both of your sentences are correct examples of an
entirely different use of commas -- the use of a *single* comma to offset an
introductory phrase ['As a rule of thumb' or 'if you can't replace them by
parentheses (and then delete the whole expression) without making what is
left ungrammatical'] from the main sentence (respectively, 'commas are
supposed to come in pairs' and 'you've got them wrong').
[snip creative and unnecessarily complicated description of grammar wrt
commas]
> So my first sentence is probably ok and the second probably isn't.
>
Both sentences are perfectly fine, though not for the reasons you thought.
You know, most college bookstores have these laminated one-page guides to
good grammar available for about $1. I still use the one my high school
English teacher handed out lo those many years ago.
Ed
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> In short, it is a painful experience but worth it. (And by the way in
> the US [at least in my field] you are also expected to add something
> new to your field.
Yours was a PhD thesis though, wasn't it? That's right and proper then.
:-)
Well, it would be right and proper for University graduation in Italy
too, only it's not really feasible. You should have a narrow field of
interest, and work on it in advance. This is not what actually
happens... University in Italy is terrible, and unbelievable by foreign
standards. Yes, we do produce lots of fairly good scientists: it is
because those who can actually survive the process tend to be smart.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> As a rule of thumb, commas are supposed to come in pairs. They are
> like small pairs of parentheses - if you can't replace them by
> parentheses (and then delete the whole expression) without making
> what is left ungrammatical, you've got them wrong.
This is NOT the correct rule for the use of commas in Italian. It could
well be in English, I don't know.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
Horrible, isn't it? It's downright painful for me to read this
dissertation - she seems to have gotten _all_ her commas wrong. It's
like hearing chalk screech on a blackboard all the time. Very hard to
concentrate on the content.
Patricia J. Hawkins
JLC> [on commas]
JLC> On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 10:21:00 -0600, Edward John Schoenfeld
JLC> <ejscho...@mindspring.com> said:
>>> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
JLC> (snip)>> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
>>> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
>>> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
>>> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
>>
>> I believe this is ungrammatical in English as one never separates the
>> subject (One of the first characterizations of computation) from the verb
>> (was). One might *insert* a phrase offset by commas *between* the subject
>> and verb, as in "Ada Lovelace, a countess, was one of the first
>> computational scientists."
JLC> As a rule of thumb, commas are supposed to come in pairs. They are
JLC> like small pairs of parentheses - if you can't replace them by
JLC> parentheses (and then delete the whole expression) without making
JLC> what is left ungrammatical, you've got them wrong.
This is true only when the commas are offsetting a clause in the
middle of a sentence -- so it's the right rule to use when punctuating
dear Ada, above, but it's wrong in many other cases; see below.
JLC> Both sentences in my previous paragraph are wrong by this
JLC> definition.
No -- your algorithm is overbroad. Your commas are correct.
JLC> Edward's (Ed's?) example shows correct use of commas.
JLC> So why are mine wrong? Firstly, I sprinkle commas around like someone
JLC> sprinkling salt on food before tasting it (autocondimentation - nice
JLC> word that :-).
You know how to put commas in correctly; your implicit rules are
correct. Just ditch that explicit rule about commas in pairs, it's
only useful to people who are consciously aware of clauses.
JLC> Secondly, I think it is ok to match a comma with an imaginary comma
JLC> at the beginning or end of the sentence. So "As a rule of thumb" can
JLC> be treated as a paranthetical expression and deleted.
You should put a comma after an introductory word, phrase, or clause.
You have done this quite properly, formally, and correctly.
The above was an instance of the use of serial commas. These are also
correct; use them before the "and" in a list. However, in Britain and
in some informal publications in the US, you omit them.
You should also use a comma wherever there is a logical pause, or
wherever you begin a new thought.[1]
JLC> In the second
JLC> sentence, the solitary comma is standing in for a missing "then" i.e.
JLC> it represent the pause which I would make in speaking because I don't
JLC> usually say the "then". It's definitely breaking the rules but I
JLC> can't think of a better way to punctuate it.
That's because you are punctuating correctly, all the way through.
JLC> If I (correctly) omit
JLC> the comma then it makes the sentence harder to read (IMO) and I'm
JLC> not usually willing, as in this sentence, to use "then" instead of
JLC> inserting a comma.
JLC> So my first sentence is probably ok and the second probably isn't.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
[1] This sentence lifted verbatim from p. 96 of _Bugs in Writing_, by
Lyn Dupre (Revised Edition, Addison Wesley, 1998). Which I highly
recommend, as it's written for nerds like you and me. In fact, just
about all of my post was cribbed from her chapter on commas, since I,
like you, punctuate from an implicit rather than explicit knowledge of
the rules. It's just that I happen to know, due to lots of feedback,
that I'm usually dead on.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Hawkins Internet Applications, LLC
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> The above was an instance of the use of serial commas. These are also
> correct; use them before the "and" in a list. However, in Britain and
> in some informal publications in the US, you omit them.
One of the usages that's completely different between Italian and
English is that in Italian you can't, can't, can't, no no no, bad
writer, use a comma before "and". In lists, for example, you should
write: "apple, oranges and pears", and not "apple, oranges, and pears".
It's a complete no-no. But I keep doing it. I guess English ruined me in
this, but I keep hearing a comma there.
Edward John Schoenfeld
> From: b.s...@csuohio.edu (Brian M. Scott)
> Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.composition
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:07:57 GMT
> Subject: Re: On the writing of dissertations
>
Retro Me, Sathanas!
Ed
Zeborah
> One thing that is going on when we write is that even when we write
> very closely from a particular character's point of view, we are still
> really being observers who are capturing and presenting the
> character's point of view. What am I speaking of, um, yes: the
> Heisenberg principle, right?
Ooh, that's it. Every time I write something down in the character's
pov, by the very act of writing it down I'm changing the character.
This is what leads me to have Revelations that require vast rewrites.
Clearly I need some sort of Heisenberg compensator. (Then I could also
build a transporter and cut out a lot of travel time from my life.)
Zeborah
--
Semper ad eventum festinet. -- Horace
"Always party hard at social events." <eg>
http://www.geocities.com/zeborahnz2000
Edward John Schoenfeld
> From: ada...@tin.it (Anna Feruglio Dal Dan)
> Organization: [Infostrada]
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.composition
> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:07:44 GMT
> Subject: Re: On the writing of dissertations
>
> Patricia J. Hawkins <phaw...@connact.com> wrote:
>
>> The above was an instance of the use of serial commas. These are also
>> correct; use them before the "and" in a list. However, in Britain and
>> in some informal publications in the US, you omit them.
>
> One of the usages that's completely different between Italian and
> English is that in Italian you can't, can't, can't, no no no, bad
> writer, use a comma before "and". In lists, for example, you should
> write: "apple, oranges and pears", and not "apple, oranges, and pears".
> It's a complete no-no. But I keep doing it. I guess English ruined me in
> this, but I keep hearing a comma there.
>
I was taught to use the comma before and in a series ONLY if the series was
ending with the next term. So the sentence 'One bowl each of oranges, apples
and pears, cherries, and blueberries' means that one of the bowls has both
apples and pears in it, while the cherries and blueberries are alone in
their respective bowls.
It is becoming increasingly common to omit the comma before the final and in
a series, though. Different publications have different style sheets.
Ed
Margaret Young
Dan) wrote:
>Margaret Young <mmy...@umich.edu> wrote:
>
>> In short, it is a painful experience but worth it. (And by the way in
>> the US [at least in my field] you are also expected to add something
>> new to your field.
>
>Yours was a PhD thesis though, wasn't it? That's right and proper then.
>:-)
Yup and thanks
>
>Well, it would be right and proper for University graduation in Italy
>too, only it's not really feasible. You should have a narrow field of
>interest, and work on it in advance. This is not what actually
>happens... University in Italy is terrible, and unbelievable by foreign
>standards. Yes, we do produce lots of fairly good scientists: it is
>because those who can actually survive the process tend to be smart.
I have an incredibly narrow field of expertise (in the sense of how
many people have enough knowledge to critique by work). One of my
collegues estimated that perhaps 200 people would know the
literature/research I am working from and less than 50 could make
intelligent comments on much of it. I think he was exaggerating (I
think many academics underestimate people outside the realms of
academia) but there aren't a lot of people who get EXACTLY what I am
talking about.
I was fairly general at the BA level, got more specialized at the MA
level and downright narrow at the PhD level.
But I love the _entire_ field, which makes teaching fun for me. I am
one of those lucky souls who is doing for pay what I would do for pure
enjoyment anyway.
Tim S
> I may have a problem with a story I have in mind, a few
> projects down the line.
[much snippage].
This is a bit of a stab in the dark here, because I don't know the
details of what's gone wrong with the story so far. However, it seems
to me from your replies to earlier posts in this thread that the
problem may not be with the voice per se, but rather that there are
some basic contradictions in what you're trying to get the story to
do. The two things I noticed are:
1) The POV character is too embarrassed to tell the story himself, and
you're too embarrassed to tell it for him, and it's _his_ story, so
the other characters can't tell it either (OK, I'm extrapolating and
simplifying somewhat. But this seems to be a core problem). The
obvious conclusion is that the story shouldn't be told, and the
question then is, Why do you think it should be told? What's the point
that you're trying to get across? Why do we need to know? Presumably
it's not just to watch the poor chap writhe in embarrassment and
confusion (or whatever the reason is that he isn't going to tell us
himself). Maybe thinking about this would make it easier to see what
the narrator's overall attitude or approach should be? And then
perhaps the voice would work itself out.
2) You said somewhere that the narration wants to be from a modern
perspective but the POV character is 500 years earlier (or something
like that). Some people have suggested creating a modern
shadow-character that has a modern point of view but no involvement in
the plot, and the shadow-character can be the narrator. This sounds
like good advice to me; but it leaves me wondering, Why do you feel
that the narrator needs to be modern? And this also seems to connect
with point 1 - the question of what the point of telling the story is.
Is there some sort of modern moral to it (for want of a better word)?
Does it not make sense from the characters' point of view?
I don't know if this is any use - maybe not if all you know is that it
_ought_ to be that way and that's all there is to it. If it was me,
I'd think about it more and more abstractly until I'd pulled out the
fundamental core reasons why I wanted things to be a certain way and
then it would be obvious what was going on and what I should do
(possibly give up!...) But that's just the way I work.
Also, I know how I might write this, because it's something I like to
do anyway: I'd maybe use a loose-third omniscient. The narrative voice
follows the character around, you see what he sees, you know what he
feels, but you don't notice quite the same things that he notices,
you don't have the same take on things, you can make use of facts he
doesn't know, and you aren't personally involved in his experiences.
The disadvantage is that you lose the immediacy of tight third. On the
other hand, you can still be quite sympathetic and you get to make
comments that he couldn't possibly make. I don't know whether this is
any help to you though - maybe you would still feel you were
impertinently telling his story for him in a way he wouldn't like.
That's my two penn'orth. Don't know if this any use to you.
Dorothy J Heydt
Jaana Heino <ja...@iki.fi> wrote:
>
>In Finnish you learn this matnra of connectives in school: "että jotta
>koska kun jos vaikka kuin kunnes ja sekä eli tai vai mutta vaan" ("that,
>therefore, because, when, if, even though, like, until", etc, cannot
>translate the rest so that I can capture the difference between the two
>ands and two likes and two ors). And then you learn the rules to go with
>each. And the exceptions to those rules. And the exceptions to the
>exceptions. And after that, it really is very simple.
>
>Hmh. I don't sound convincing. Must be the mulled wine.
Oh, I believe you. When I was learning German we had to memorize
a list of prepositions, namely, aus, ausser, bei, mit, nach,
seit, von, zu, which all took the dative case. And there was
another list I've forgotten that all took the accusative. And
there was ANOTHER list that took one or the other and changed the
meaning thereby. Same as Latin. English, however, has lost its
cases and I found it all very confusing.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Brian M. Scott
<ejscho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
[...]
>It is becoming increasingly common to omit the comma before the final and in
>a series, though. Different publications have different style sheets.
It's actually quite an old usage. I believe that it has been the
Rightpondian norm for some time, but Fowler indicates that in his day
there was no general agreement of any kind.
Brian
Patricia J. Hawkins
EJS> I was taught to use the comma before and in a series ONLY if the series was
EJS> ending with the next term. So the sentence 'One bowl each of oranges, apples
EJS> and pears, cherries, and blueberries' means that one of the bowls has both
EJS> apples and pears in it, while the cherries and blueberries are alone in
EJS> their respective bowls.
EJS> It is becoming increasingly common to omit the comma before the final and in
EJS> a series, though. Different publications have different style sheets.
My college's alumnae email list has many former and current copy
editors, writers, medievalists, and other amateur and professional
grammarians. We had a short but pithy discussion of history and
personal preference regarding serial commas.
--
Patricia J. Hawkins
Brooks Moses
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> > This is your Babbage dissertation, did I remember that right?
[...]
> Dissertations in Italy are supposed to be an original contribution to
> the field one's supposed to graduate in.
Same here in the U.S., at least in the fields I know of (which are
mainly Engineering and Science; I think it's the same in other areas but
I'm less certain).
I suspect that finding something original to do is much easier in
technical fields. At worst, one can simply take leading-edge
measurement tool A, be the first to apply it to heavily-studied question
B, and get an original contribution. Which is often sufficiently
effort-requiring to be worth a thesis, but often doesn't seem to take
that much imagination at the outset.
> I aspire to do this with a minimum of dignity*. And without every comma
> being inflicted on the reader as a painful screech. (I don't know if
> this sounds as horrible in English, punctuation rules varies greatly
> between languages, but "One of the first characterization of
> computation, was that of the Countess Ada Lovelace". I think you can do
> that in English - and you _have_ to do it in German, IIRC - but trust
> me, in Italian that sounds atrocious).
That's a common thing to do in English, but it's not right. It doesn't
sound atrocious, to me, but it looks very much so. And it's made all
the more grating by the fact that it's one of the most common misuses of
the little curls.
> * There was a booklet by Umberto Eco about "How to write a graduation
> dissertation". It was a huge success when it came out - Eco's first
> money-earner, long before the Rose - and it's been a long-seller ever
> since. It's an incredibly wise and down-to-earth guide on how to write a
> scholarly paper, enjoyable even by somebody who doesn't have to face
> this dreadful thing. Among other things he warns aspiring graduates to
> avoid subjects that will swallow you whole - many titles turn into, he
> said, "Brief notes on the Universe". I already fell into this once.
Is there an English version of this booklet, or is it only available in
Italian? If so, I need copies. Multiple. Leads on how to obtain same
would be appreciated muchly. :)
- Brooks, writing his own _Brief Notes_.
Dan Goodman
pwred...@aol.com says...
> In article <MPG.168088479...@news.visi.com>, Dan Goodman
> <dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>
> >Some sf/fantasy writers _do_ arrive at the heartwarming conclusion that
> >they've learned everything they have to -- and now all they need do is
> >write the same kind of story they've been successful with, for the rest
> >of their lives.
>
> Oh, please, Dan, don't limit it to just SF/F writers! Heck, you don't even
> have to limit it to writers, if you change it from "write the same kind of
> story" to "do the same things." They are the sort of people I most often want
> to whack upside the head. Several times. With a very large two-by-four.
You mean with a clue-by-four, before the reality of changing times hits
them?
The voters aren't the same kind of people who used to be in the district;
teenagers aren't buying the same clothes people their age did ten years
ago....
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
Edward John Schoenfeld
> From: Brooks Moses <bmo...@stanford.edu>
David Sternberg, How to Complete and Survive a Doctoral Dissertation (New
York: St. Martins Griffin, 1981) ISBN 0-312-39605-8 or 0-312-39606-6 (pbk)
I picked my copy up in a college bookstore about halfway through
(unfortunately) my dissertation writing experience. It should still be in
print.
Ed
Brenda W. Clough
Dan Goodman wrote:
Consider all the pop stars grinding around songs that sound just like their old hits
(Mick Jagger, are you listening?). Or the TV stars, starring in yet another sitcom
or doctor drama long after their glory days are past (Dick van Dyke, this means
you).
Brenda
--
---------
Brenda W. Clough, author of DOORS OF DEATH AND LIFE
Reading on Wednesday December 19th at 7 pm
at KGB Bar, 85 east 4th St., New York City
http://www.sff.net/people/Brenda/
Cathy Purchis-Jefferies
>
> One of the things you'll discover when you get published is that it's
> like walking a mountain range: there's always a higher peak ahead of
> you.
No experience with getting published yet, but I will comment that one of
the phychologically sort of easy things about climbing Mt. Whitney [1]
was that as long as I could see anything higher than where I was, I knew
I wasn't there yet.
--
"George" Cathy Purchis cat...@value.net
[1] Highest mountain the Continental US, 14,495', for those not
acquainted with US geography.
Patricia C. Wrede
<dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>The voters aren't the same kind of people who used to be in the district;
>teenagers aren't buying the same clothes people their age did ten years
>ago....
Tell me about it. My eldest niece just turned sixteen, and I have Christmas
shopping to do...
Patricia C. Wrede
Lucy Kemnitzer
wrote:
>In article <MPG.168088479...@news.visi.com>, Dan Goodman
><dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>
>>Some sf/fantasy writers _do_ arrive at the heartwarming conclusion that
>>they've learned everything they have to -- and now all they need do is
>>write the same kind of story they've been successful with, for the rest
>>of their lives.
>
>Oh, please, Dan, don't limit it to just SF/F writers! Heck, you don't even
>have to limit it to writers, if you change it from "write the same kind of
>story" to "do the same things." They are the sort of people I most often want
>to whack upside the head. Several times. With a very large two-by-four.
Oh how I would love to do the same thing twice, let alone over and
over, and learn how to do it for once in my life. The best teacher I
ever had had been teaching the same class for thirty years -- not the
same way, she had refined it over and over, but she knew exactly what
we would need at each stage of the class. I envy that. I never teach
the same subject twice, hardly. (and they damned well complain about
how the teachers are all underqualified -- I'd qualify if I could get
some sequential experience, but that's not what substitutes get)
Of course that's not what you're talking about here.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Irina Rempt
> When I was learning German we had to memorize
> a list of prepositions, namely, aus, ausser, bei, mit, nach,
> seit, von, zu, which all took the dative case. And there was
> another list I've forgotten that all took the accusative.
I've forgotten that one as well. I've always done the dative-only and
accusative-only prepositions right more or less intuitively, so I
could just commit the list to short-term memory when reciting the
list was called for and forget it immediately afterwards.
> And
> there was ANOTHER list that took one or the other and changed the
> meaning thereby.
I remember this, because there was a rhyme to go with it:
An, auf, hinter, neben, in,
über, unter, vor und zwischen
gehen mit dem vierten Fall
wenn man fragen kan "wohin?"
mit dem dritten gehen sie dann
wenn man fragt "wo?" oder "wann?"
(i.e. they go with the accusative when you can ask "where to?" and
with the dative when you ask "where?" or "when?")
Irina
--
ir...@valdyas.org
http://www.valdyas.org/irina/index.html (English)
http://www.valdyas.org/irina/backpage.html (Nederlands)
David Goldfarb
<mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <9v7gou$e8p$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
>gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>
>> In article <47cd1ug3id4illae4...@4ax.com>,
>> Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>> >On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:13:51 +0000, Charlie Stross
>> ><cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
>> >
>> >Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like
>>this
>> >newsgroup.
>>
>> AOL. (I tend to consider this group a slightly skewed
>>extension of rasseff.)
>
>Skewed? How dare you call us...
>
>You know, you have a point, there.
Um, not necessarily skewed in an objective sense, rather skewed
*relative to rasseff*. That is, not quite approaching things
in the same way as the other group.
--
David Goldfarb <*>|"I require three things in a man. He must be
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | handsome, ruthless, and stupid."
|
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Dorothy Parker
Brooks Moses
> In article <9v7kmu$f82$1...@thorium.cix.co.uk>,
> <mary_...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> >In article <9v7gou$e8p$1...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
> >gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (David Goldfarb) wrote:
> >> AOL. (I tend to consider this group a slightly skewed
> >>extension of rasseff.)
> >
> >Skewed? How dare you call us...
> >
> >You know, you have a point, there.
>
> Um, not necessarily skewed in an objective sense, rather skewed
> *relative to rasseff*. That is, not quite approaching things
> in the same way as the other group.
*looks around quizzically*
There's an objective value of "non-skewed" to compare against? Really?
Where?
I certainly don't think "normal society" is anywhere near such, and it's
the strongest contender of the remarkably weak lot. Everything's
skewed, from most perspectives, and there is no canonical inertial
reference frame to measure unskewed against.
- Brooks
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> English, however, has lost its
> cases and I found it all very confusing.
_I_ find it a great relief.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> But I love the _entire_ field, which makes teaching fun for me. I am
> one of those lucky souls who is doing for pay what I would do for pure
> enjoyment anyway.
Yeah, well, I was one too, only the pay was a pittance and they kicked
me out of it anyway. So now here I am with Babbage. I love this as well
but I feel hopelessly inadeguate. I spent the better part of five years
theroretically studying philosphy, but most of it consisted of
memorizing controversies about the Holy Trinity during medieval times
for which I had not interest whatsoever. That's what Philosophy is like
here, I had to go to another Faculty entirely to be able to follow a
course in formal logic, because Philosophy doesn't have one. Come the
discussione of my dissertation, I won't have to worry about my audience
knowing who Pascal was, but I might have to explain Turing.
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> > * There was a booklet by Umberto Eco about "How to write a graduation
> > dissertation". It was a huge success when it came out - Eco's first
> > money-earner, long before the Rose - and it's been a long-seller ever
> > since. It's an incredibly wise and down-to-earth guide on how to write a
> > scholarly paper, enjoyable even by somebody who doesn't have to face
> > this dreadful thing. Among other things he warns aspiring graduates to
> > avoid subjects that will swallow you whole - many titles turn into, he
> > said, "Brief notes on the Universe". I already fell into this once.
>
> Is there an English version of this booklet, or is it only available in
> Italian? If so, I need copies. Multiple. Leads on how to obtain same
> would be appreciated muchly. :)
I don't know, that man has written too damn much, and all his English
translations have a different title from the one I know in Italian. I
had a brief look in Amazon and Powell, but it didn't jump out at me.
I don't think it was translated though - it would have to be heavily
localized, it was a guide to writing up a dissertation for an Italian
University, with all its peculiarities and quirks. (I don't think you
need to write a dissertation to graduate in the USA: you only do if you
do a PhD. There is no distinction between MA, BA, and PhD in Italian
University, we're all in for a sort of poor man's PhD - or at least,
there wasn't until a little while ago, and I'm still with the old
system.)
Brooks Moses
> > > * There was a booklet by Umberto Eco about "How to write a graduation
> > > dissertation". It was a huge success when it came out - Eco's first
> > > money-earner, long before the Rose - and it's been a long-seller ever
> > > since. It's an incredibly wise and down-to-earth guide on how to write a
> > > scholarly paper, enjoyable even by somebody who doesn't have to face
> > > this dreadful thing. Among other things he warns aspiring graduates to
> > > avoid subjects that will swallow you whole - many titles turn into, he
> > > said, "Brief notes on the Universe". I already fell into this once.
> >
> > Is there an English version of this booklet, or is it only available in
> > Italian? If so, I need copies. Multiple. Leads on how to obtain same
> > would be appreciated muchly. :)
>
> I don't know, that man has written too damn much, and all his English
> translations have a different title from the one I know in Italian. I
> had a brief look in Amazon and Powell, but it didn't jump out at me.
*nods*
Ah, well. If you have a mind that can usefully file such things away
for the future, if you come across such, I'd be glad to know, even if it
is months later.
> I don't think it was translated though - it would have to be heavily
> localized, it was a guide to writing up a dissertation for an Italian
> University, with all its peculiarities and quirks. (I don't think you
> need to write a dissertation to graduate in the USA: you only do if you
> do a PhD. There is no distinction between MA, BA, and PhD in Italian
> University, we're all in for a sort of poor man's PhD - or at least,
> there wasn't until a little while ago, and I'm still with the old
> system.)
Ah. Yup, here dissertations are only for a Ph.D., although some MA and
MS programs require a thesis of some description. Anyhow, as I'm doing
a Ph.D., it's still relevant. :)
Even if it's referring to peculiarities and quirks of a substantially
different system, it still would be interesting reading, I'm sure, even
if the direct applicability was lessened. My loss, I suppose, that it
wasn't translated.
- Brooks, who wishes to note that this Friday is his last day of college
classes, after eight and a third years of them.
Boudewijn Rempt
> Ah. Yup, here dissertations are only for a Ph.D., although some MA and
> MS programs require a thesis of some description. Anyhow, as I'm doing
> a Ph.D., it's still relevant. :)
When I did comparative linguistics of the Sino-Tibetan languages in
Leyden I had to complete two papers to get my MA. One of about 120
pages, one a bit shorter, but both were expected to add something real
to the field, and be of publishable quality. In fact the first was
published, and the second is so publishable that the publisher is still
busy preparing it for publication, ten years after the fact...
--
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.valdyas.org
Boyd & Michelle Bottorff
> >Has anybody ever had the problem where they know how the
> >story goes, they know the people in it, they know everything
> >they need to know to write it... /except/ the voice?
>
> Yes.
>
> I wish I could tell you how I solved it. I had a partial
> first draft that I was slogging through. I abandoned
> it and brooded. I read a story by another author and
> went "yes! more like that!", took some rapid and
> sketchy notes, and then sat on it for another little
> while. Then I started from scratch, and I had the voice.
>
> It was altogether weird.
I thought I posted to this thread, but that entire upload worth of
messages seems to have dissapeared into the ether.
In my current WIP I had a problem where I was trying to tell the story
in the protagonist's voice and it was wrong for the story I wanted to
tell, and I was very frustrated and wrote the beginning over several
times swaping POV between first and filtered third and so forth, and it
eventually became obvious that I needed someone else's voice. Using my
other main character didn't seem right for technical reasons, so I
turned a character who at the time was stage dressing, but was going to
be (invisibly) on scene for the whole story into the narrator. That
worked wonderfully, and I'm now at 90 000 words and am almost done the
rough draft.
It was pointed out later that I could have used the same voice with a
narrator that was *not* present, but the way I was doing it felt better
to me.
Michelle Bottorff
--
Family webpage: http://home.sprintmail.com/~mbottorff/index.html
Lady Lavender's Filksongs: http://www.freemars.org/lavender/index.html
27r:2a:1p
Jonathan L Cunningham
said:
>Oh how I would love to do the same thing twice, let alone over and
>over, and learn how to do it for once in my life.
I'd like to live my teens and twenties again, knowing what I know
now. It would be nice to avoid the worst mistakes and get some
things right :-).
>The best teacher I
>ever had had been teaching the same class for thirty years -- not the
>same way, she had refined it over and over, but she knew exactly what
>we would need at each stage of the class.
The best teacher I ever had was my physics teacher when I was around
15 and 16. He would sit up at the front of the class, writing out from
memory, and drawing all the diagrams which were *exactly* what you
needed to know to pass the exams. (Seeing them being drawn makes them
a *lot* easier to remember than staring at the completed diagram in
a book.)
Meanwhile, as well as explaining what he was drawing, he would be
explaining verbally what it was *really* all about in a way which
made it interesting. What he wrote and what he said were different.
So, students could sit at the back, copying it all down and ignoring
what he was saying. If they memorised it and regurgitated it they
would pass the exams. Or you could listen to the explanation, so
that you actually understood it, while mindlessly copying down the
words to read later.
I think what made him good was realising that it is important to
pass exams, but that this has little to do with understanding a
subject.
(snip)
>
>Of course that's not what you're talking about here.
>
>Lucy Kemnitzer
--
Jonathan L Cunningham
Jonathan L Cunningham
<ejscho...@mindspring.com> said:
>That (to offset parenthetical phrases) is ONE of the uses of commas in
Thanx for your and Patricia Hawkins' corrections. Just shows what a
friendly group this can be - to get something so wrong without
getting flamed!
Of course comma separated lists are another use of commas - my brain
had decided to go for a walk, leaving me at the computer on my own.
And there may be more uses (as you both said).
I do find it a useful rule, even so. Sometimes they show I've missed
a comma, sometimes they show I don't need one and sometimes they
deserve a hard look: "Ok, comma, justify your existence or
be expunged!" It may not be so generally useful to other people, but
we all have our little quirks. :-).
Jonathan
--
Jonathan L Cunningham
Lucy Kemnitzer
(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>In article <47cd1ug3id4illae4...@4ax.com>,
>Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>>On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 00:13:51 +0000, Charlie Stross
>><cha...@nospam.antipope.org> wrote:
>>
>>>We're all here to learn. Aren't we?
>>
>>Nope, a significant portion of us are here because we like this
>>newsgroup.
>
>AOL. (I tend to consider this group a slightly skewed extension
>of rasseff.)
>
Oi. Rassf has its place, but I come here to work.
Lucy Kemnitzer
Dorothy J Heydt
Irina Rempt <ir...@valdyas.org> wrote:
>
>An, auf, hinter, neben, in,
>über, unter, vor und zwischen
>gehen mit dem vierten Fall
>wenn man fragen kan "wohin?"
>mit dem dritten gehen sie dann
>wenn man fragt "wo?" oder "wann?"
>
>(i.e. they go with the accusative when you can ask "where to?" and
>with the dative when you ask "where?" or "when?")
Those are the ones; and Latin does the same. I was able to
remember those without knowing the rhyme, just because it made
sense. Sort of.
Dorothy J Heydt
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>
>> English, however, has lost its
>> cases and I found it all very confusing.
>
>_I_ find it a great relief.
Oh, what I meant is that because English has lost its cases I
found it confusing to try to learn German, which hasn't.
Though, mind you, English now expresses the material that used to
be expressed by case-endings with niceties of word order and
stuff, which can be confusing to speakers of other languages. A
lot of the nitty-gritty of English is now covered in what one of
my linguistics professors used to call "covert classes."
Boudewijn Rempt
> When I translate manuals, I avoid it because most agency
> stylesheets forbid it and I know that it would be considered an
> error, and anyway technical writing doesn't normally require that
> level of stylistic subtlety. When I write fiction, I use it much
> as I would in English (except for lists) -- and it is *right*,
> dammit! (I'm sure you'll find plenty of examples if you read good
> Italian writers -- which to me is always a final answer on
> questions of this kind.) (My grammar also agrees with me, at
> least to the extent that it doesn't mention the issue, while it
> does mention separating subject and verb as an error.)
The same holds for Dutch, and I have same feeling as you do. My mother
however, who's a retired school teacher, never tires of telling me off
when I use a comma before 'en', even in the Dutch version of the first
sentence of my reply. But I've foiled her -- nowaday I write in English,
and she can't read it. No more maternal criticism!
Brian M. Scott
wrote:
>Anna Feruglio Dal Dan wrote:
[...]
>> (I don't think you
>> need to write a dissertation to graduate in the USA: you only do if you
>> do a PhD. There is no distinction between MA, BA, and PhD in Italian
>> University, we're all in for a sort of poor man's PhD - or at least,
>> there wasn't until a little while ago, and I'm still with the old
>> system.)
>Ah. Yup, here dissertations are only for a Ph.D., although some MA and
>MS programs require a thesis of some description. Anyhow, as I'm doing
>a Ph.D., it's still relevant. :)
And some MA and MS programs offer both a thesis and a non-thesis
option. The thesis can be a pretty substantial piece of work, too.
My ex-wife's, in history, differed from a PhD thesis primarily in the
amount of primary and secondary material on which it was based.
I've also run into a few programs that require an undergraduate
thesis, though this is (a) rare and (b) usually imposed by the
department, not the school.
[...]
Brian, who feels faintly guilty, having written his dissertation in
two weeks over a Christmas break; but it was in pure math, which has
its own rules
Patricia C. Wrede
Kemnitzer) writes:
>Oh how I would love to do the same thing twice, let alone over and
>over, and learn how to do it for once in my life. The best teacher I
>ever had had been teaching the same class for thirty years -- not the
>same way, she had refined it over and over, but she knew exactly what
>we would need at each stage of the class. I envy that. I never teach
>the same subject twice, hardly. (and they damned well complain about
>how the teachers are all underqualified -- I'd qualify if I could get
>some sequential experience, but that's not what substitutes get)
>
>Of course that's not what you're talking about here.
No, but it occurs to me that it's the real root of the problem. That is,
people mistakenly assume that mere repetition of something that worked once is
the same as the flexible expertise that comes with much practice. Your best
teacher likely wouldn't have been best if she hadn't *refined it over and over*
-- she wasn't just repeating the exact same lesson plans that she'd been using
for thirty years, she kept improving it based on experience. But some people
would just look at the thirty years of "doing the same thing", and never
realize that it *wasn't* the same thing, quite. So they think that the way you
get to be "the best" is longevity and exact repetition, rather than practice
and flexibility.
People who are merely repeating what *used* to work tend not to notice that
anything outside their narrow circle has changed, and they are consequently
surprised when the cumulative changes in the outside world come crashing in on
them. But that seems to be fairly common for people who aren't interested in
growing and learning. They'd want to teach the same class in order to settle
into a comfortable rut; *you* want to teach it in order to get better at
teaching in general and teaching that class in specific. There's a fundamental
difference in attitude...and I know which one *I'd* rather have in a teacher
(or anybody else, for that matter). [One can hope that most of the people with
the former sort of get-in-a-rut attitude don't go into teaching in the first
place, which is why they're cluttering up all the other professions with their
idiotic notions.]
Patricia C. Wrede
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> The list example you gave is in fact the only one where the comma
> is truly really forbidden (unlike in English). In other cases it
> can be used, but it's kind of tricky and it requires language
> sensitivity: this is probably the reason why so many teachers
> have decided to forbid it outright in all cases. But it is a
> stylistic tool that really shouldn't be thrown out with the
> bathwater <hrnch>: it can be very effective.
I was told that it was always wrong - but the fact is I keep not hearing
it as wrong in the case of lists either. Which makes my ear in this case
not totally reliable.
> When I translate manuals, I avoid it because most agency
> stylesheets forbid it and I know that it would be considered an
> error, and anyway technical writing doesn't normally require that
> level of stylistic subtlety. When I write fiction, I use it much
> as I would in English (except for lists) -- and it is *right*,
> dammit! (I'm sure you'll find plenty of examples if you read good
> Italian writers -- which to me is always a final answer on
> questions of this kind.) (My grammar also agrees with me, at
> least to the extent that it doesn't mention the issue, while it
> does mention separating subject and verb as an error.)
I use it. It's up to the reviewer then to take responsability for taking
them out: that's what they're paid for.
Mare Kuntz
Heydt) wrote:
>Oh, I believe you. When I was learning German we had to memorize
>a list of prepositions, namely, aus, ausser, bei, mit, nach,
>seit, von, zu, which all took the dative case. And there was
>another list I've forgotten that all took the accusative. And
>there was ANOTHER list that took one or the other and changed the
>meaning thereby. Same as Latin. English, however, has lost its
>cases and I found it all very confusing.
Ugh, don't mention Latin! I just got back from failing my Latin
final, so now I'm sentenced to taking the class all over again next
semester. X_X
-Mare
Mare Kuntz
(Chris Dollin) wrote:
>In article <3c17acbb...@news.psu.edu>,
> sunand...@excite.com (Mare Kuntz) writes:
>>
>> Alas, that advice comes too late for me - I'm already thirty pages
>> into writing a structuralist anatomy and physiology of fiction. Yes,
>> _all_ fiction. Possible Title: _Fiction Is As Fiction Does_. And
>> this is supposedly a thesis, not a dissertation. I realize this is
>> stupid and perhaps impossible, not to mention egotistical of me to
>> presume I know enough to write it, but I'm having fun writing it.
>
>You might then be interested in Nick Lowe's _The Classical Plot and
>the Invention of Western Narrative_. It's made me add _The Illiad_
>and _The Odyssey_ to my buying list.
Thanks, this looks interesting, I'll grab it from my University's
library before I go home for holiday break.
-Mare
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> But I've foiled her -- nowaday I write in English,
> and she can't read it. No more maternal criticism!
That's a bonus point I hadn't considered...
Heather Rose Jones
>
> Anna Feruglio Dal Dan wrote:
> > > This is your Babbage dissertation, did I remember that right?
> [...]
> > Dissertations in Italy are supposed to be an original contribution to
> > the field one's supposed to graduate in.
>
> Same here in the U.S., at least in the fields I know of (which are
> mainly Engineering and Science; I think it's the same in other areas but
> I'm less certain).
>
> I suspect that finding something original to do is much easier in
> technical fields. At worst, one can simply take leading-edge
> measurement tool A, be the first to apply it to heavily-studied question
> B, and get an original contribution. Which is often sufficiently
> effort-requiring to be worth a thesis, but often doesn't seem to take
> that much imagination at the outset.
While I didn't do it entirely intentionally, my method for skipping the
step of researching "has anyone already done this topic to death" was:
- Pick a relatively less-studied language
- Pick a relatively less-studied period of the language
- Pick a relatively less-studied part of speech
- Apply a relatively new theoretical framework
After that, it was just a matter of finding an angle I found personally
interesting. (Hence: a cognitive analysis of the grammaticalization of
Medieval Welsh prepositions.)
--
*********
Heather Rose Jones
hrj...@socrates.berkeley.edu
*********