Grammar

[Figging Mint]

We have bacon flavoured...

May not be the week for it, 'til Sunday anyway.

[Figging Mint]

So do I. Never really have lessons on grammar that I remember.  But then again I may have been staring out of the window at the time.

*robot voice*

Activate subliminal grammar coding.        Parsing and usage checklists -confirm.   
Prepare distraction mechanism.              Preliminary albedo checklist - confirm. 
Release distraction mechanism

*shades voice*

"Oooh shiny!"   "And who's that boy over there?"

*robot voice*
Target acquired.
Target confirmed.
Inject first grammar series.                *hiss* *hiss* *hiss*
Proceed to active distraction recovery protocols

[Snowleopard]

You might also try - The Transitive Vampire by Karen E. Gordon.
She's also done - The Well Tempered Sentence.  Getting your grammar with some humor.

[Dina]

Well, according to a comment on the video FM posted "The Oxford comma is the difference between "We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin" (3 attending the party) and "We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin." (2 attending, and both are strippers)", I will say that, as a Spanish native speaker, I hate the comma before the "and". In Spanish, it's a mistake. And I have problems using it in Englsh, even when the paper reviewers always add it to my texts.

[Darkshore]

The Oxford Comma is really more of a style choice really. I think Oxford actually dropped it recently, there was a twitter hashtag and all that jazz.

[Shecky]

Is it bad that I follow the rule that you place a comma where you want a sentence pause and in lists?  Because I haven't taken a class on Grammar since 2002.  That said, I've done a good job of picking up on what feels and reads correctly.  I think...

Since that's the ultimate purpose of a comma (to separate items and to imitate spoken-language pauses), I see no problem with the principle.

[Shecky]

Well, according to a comment on the video FM posted "The Oxford comma is the difference between "We invited the strippers, JFK, and Stalin" (3 attending the party) and "We invited the strippers, JFK and Stalin." (2 attending, and both are strippers)", I will say that, as a Spanish native speaker, I hate the comma before the "and". In Spanish, it's a mistake. And I have problems using it in Englsh, even when the paper reviewers always add it to my texts.

The people who proudly point at those examples to "prove" the "validity" of the Oxford comma fail to look at the other side: the reasonable alternative of "We invited the strippers: JFK and Stalin" vs. a simply reordered "We invited JFK, Stalin and the strippers". Solved!

[Starbeam]

Once you've learned the rules, you can bend and break them logically.

Absolutely.

The Oxford Comma is really more of a style choice really. I think Oxford actually dropped it recently, there was a twitter hashtag and all that jazz.

That also ended up being some sort of slip-up, I believe. Something about it not being required for emails and such, but it was still required for anything formal. They'd put up a page about it just after the twitter stuff.

The people who proudly point at those examples to "prove" the "validity" of the Oxford comma fail to look at the other side: the reasonable alternative of "We invited the strippers: JFK and Stalin" vs. a simply reordered "We invited JFK, Stalin and the strippers". Solved!

Stalin and the strippers sounds like a dance group, or something.  In that particular instance, I think the use of the comma would be recommended.

[Shecky]

I have nothing against the Oxford comma when it's needed for clarity's sake and there's no other reasonable, grammatical way to accomplish that.

[meg_evonne]

the oxford comma is a line in a song by Vampire Weekend....  (snark, snark)

I ended up going back to college to take a linguistics class. Please don't ask me what I paid for it, but I needed to be reminded what the parts of a sentence were and catch up once more on the basics to understand my S & W. My problem, once I had all that down, (and yes, this old lady aced it) the class ended--before we reached punctuation! GRRRRR!  I'm grammar deficient to the point of insanity. I even hired an editor too teach me proper grammar. She is not responsible for how I misuse her advise.

Bottom line? The linguistics class was a relief. It was so logical and precise and comforting (note the avoidance of the oxford comma debate and alienating readers) that there were truly simple and easy rules out there. The bad news--working with an editor and as I read books--there turns out to be a huge amount of 'art' to grammar. The reason for grammar usage can be an artistic statement and far more important than the 'rules'. Top this off with the simple fact tha,t as you read any book today, you will see many of the rules broken by modern editors with almost complete abandonment. Worse yet? It seems to be by accident or simple lack of grammar knowledge.  *sigh*

Now my learning method is to take a book that I KNOW is well written and diagram sentences. I love doing this with Ian Rankin. Nothing beats diagramming sentences. Keep your Suduko; I find diagramming oddly comforting--even though I continue and will always continue to abuse the grammar rules. Of course, many of those well written books I mark up with my pen are written by English authors (Ian Rankin) & they have an entirely different set of rules from those of us on this side of the pond.

I wish you well on your pursuit. There are also tests on line you can access, charts that are wonderful, but when it is pen to paper--they never seem to work for me. Also someone told me to just read it and insert commas where I pause. Excuse me, I am a trained oral interpretation person. I pause before important nouns or verbs--not at inconsequential predicates and phrases. I rarely stop at periods when reading, unless it is important to make sure someone listening is 'really hearing' what I think they should.

[Starbeam]

Top this off with the simple fact tha,t as you read any book today, you will see many of the rules broken by modern editors with almost complete abandonment. Worse yet? It seems to be by accident or simple lack of grammar knowledge.  *sigh*

Copy editor, not editor. Editors do not do the grammar/proofreading edits. Copy editors do those. Copy editors and proofreaders. Depending on the company, one works as both, or they have a different person for each.  On occasion, I've seen editors talk about line edits, but I would think they're looking more at tightening the prose than for grammar/punctuation errors. And sometimes, the changes that a copy editor/proofreader suggests will get steted by the author and not changed.

[the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh]

  On occasion, I've seen editors talk about line edits, but I would think they're looking more at tightening the prose than for grammar/punctuation errors.

They are; I am married to a published novelist and have seen this process in some detail.

[meg_evonne]

Interesting related post reference in the Sisters in Crime Oct newsletter.  Take a peek.    http://crimefictioncollective.blogspot.com/2011/10/edits-ahoy-are-you-onboard.html?m=1

and thank you on copy exitors and editors.

And did you read the comments? :-)