Remember, Homework #2 is due before class at 6:00pm on Canvas.

Plan for the Lesson

• Chapter 4: Coordination and Subordination
• A Practical Editing Situation
• Chapters 7 and 8 in Barrett
• Next Week: HOMEWORK #3 is due, so keep up with the syllabus

Although I won’t cover Barrett in these notes, please read those chapters. They might be refresher, but refreshers are good.

A Note on Coordination

Although we’re focusing on individual sentences or pairs, you know that most writing has more context. As the editor or writer, you must make effective choices to combine sentences for your topics. Often you will have to describe a situation or argue for a position, and both purposes require supporting prose. Consider the following “paragraph”:

I went to Virginia Tech. I majored in Economics and English. I did well in English. I did poorly in Economics. Economics was in the Business College. I went to Towson University. My Master’s is in Professional Writing. I had a class on rhetorical grammar. “Rhetorical Grammar” was an excellent class. That class provided a great foundation for analysis. I analyze the rhetoric of prose. Rhetoric is a topic I enjoy. I went to the University of Louisville. I did my PhD in Rhetoric/Composition there. My dissertation was on Guglielmo Marconi’s wireless. I revised that dissertation. I also expanded the dissertation. That revision and expansion became my first book.

109 words

Ok. That is difficult to write without coordination (and subordination), so I know it’s just awful to read such prose. For now, consider the grammatical choices. Unless I missed something (always embarrassing for an English professor…), every sentence is grammatically correct. However, the choice to have all simple sentences has a negative rhetorical effect—it reads very pedestrian. Everything in the paragraph is true and tells that I was an English major, have a Master’s in Professional Writing, and got a PhD in Rhetoric/Composition. But the paragraph doesn’t show that. Such choices convey a poor ethos. At the end of this page, I have a more effective revision, one that conveys an ethos of a rhetorician and professional writer.

Punctuation and Coordinating Conjunctions

This will probably be a review, but reviews are fun! In fact, what could be funner?* I have a Punctuation Refresher for my classes online for reference. I’m going to have to respectfully disagree with Kolln & Gray at the bottom of p. 48—but not at the top of p. 49. While I agree, in theory, that you can use a comma purposely for rhetorical effect, I think the example they use is too likely to be taken as a mistake, and I caution you on using this for effect. For your quizzes and exams, remember that you use a comma before a coordinating conjunction joining two independent clauses.

However, the advice on p. 49 to use a dash is quite good advice. In that situation a dash is obviously purposeful—just use sparingly!

*By the way, funner is a word…we’ll come back to this later on in the semester.

A Note on Dashes

You’ll notice I use dashes quite a bit. My dissertation advisor felt I used too many, so I scrutinized my use of them more. I probably use them too frequently, and, when you use a technique too much, it loses its effect overall. I recommend using dashes (—) infrequently.

I try to be consistent in using “–” or “—,” but sometimes different browsers display the em-dash differently as a single en-dash (-) or even an error. And sometimes I just forget. The great thing about teaching an Editing class is I can always claim any mistakes on the website were placed on purpose in order to give you some proofreading practice. Then, I rest easily at night.

The Serial Comma (aka The Oxford Comma)

I’m going to end this debate right now. Use the serial comma! If your organization’s style guide doesn’t use that comma, change jobs. This isn’t a matter of grammar; it’s a matter of style. Both using and not using the serial comma are grammatically correct. However, the serial comma is very useful for advanced writers. After you learn more about style, you’ll insist on using the serial comma because you’ll know better.

One reason people think the serial comma (the comma after and OR or) doesn’t get used is because most newspaper style guides follow Associate Press style, which omits the serial comma. Think about it. Newspapers need to fit text in columns, and printed pages only have so much real estate. It makes sense to omit superfluous commas in order to conserve space. Is that as necessary as news moves online? Nope. Instead of considering this a rule, think about it as a way to limit confusion for advanced writing.

For instance, consider the confusion that could ensue with the following:

• My uncle left me all his property, houses and cars.
  • Do houses and cars make up all his property, or does property mean a collection of smaller items such as coins, CDs, clothes, etc.?
  • Could property just mean land? Maybe context makes this clear, but your goal is to make sure the message in writing is clear.
• My uncle left me all his property, houses, and cars.
  • In this sentence, it’s obvious—100% clear—that the uncle bequeathed three separate components of his estate to a lucky child of his sibling:
    *property
    *houses
    *cars
  • Below, you’ll learn why the order of the series might want to be arranged to cars, houses, and property.

p. 50: Thinking about ordering items in a series

• With his bright sunflowers, searing wheat fields, and blazing yellow skies, Vincent van Gogh was fanatic about light.

Phrases in the series:

• bright sunflowers (5 syllables)
• searing wheat fields (4 syllables)
• blazing yellow skies (5 syllables)

Kolln & Gray point out that arranging items in a series in “order of increasing scope” or level or degree creates climax in a clause. Notice the following adjectives in the above sentence:

• bright
• searing
• blazing

The heat or intensity rises with this ordering. If you recall Buffalo Wild Wings’s sauce heat scale, this will make sense. They order their sauces from mild to %&#% hot: see Barrett’s use of friggin

• Hot
• Wild
• Blazin’ (full list)

Obviously, if your series contains steps—for instance, in procedures—you’d order them logically in the series. Alphabetizing could also be an appropriate ordering logic for series. Normally, an appropriate convention to follow is to order the series by the number of syllables per item in ascending order. For instance,

• Guglielmo Marconi excited the imaginations of artists, journalists, and entrepreneurs.
  • artists (2 syllables)
  • journalists (3 syllables)
  • entrepreneurs (4 syllables)

On p. 51, Kolln & Gray reference a passage from Barack Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Address to highlight the effectiveness of having series come with three items:

• spend wisely* (3 syllables)
• reform bad habits (5 syllables)
• do our business in the light of day (10 syllables)

Notice that the syllable count increases throughout the series, and the last phrase is double the number of syllables as the previous phrase.

*What happened to “to”? “To” in this sentence marks the use of the infinitive of a verb—it isn’t a preposition…it’s a particle. In Obama’s passage, “to” belongs to each verb in the series, but for concision, Obama doesn’t repeat it. Re-read the passage below:

• to spend wisely, [to] reform bad habits, and [to] do our business in the light of day

Prepositions are often not repeated when each phrase logically begins with the preposition introducing the series:

• Cultivating a concise, efficient prose style is good for school, [for] work, and [for] democracy.

Writing “for” in front of the 2nd and 3rd items of a series can be a rhetorical strategy to slow down and [to] emphasize each item in a series. Remember, these are stylistic suggestions, but you should know what rhetorical effects your choices have. The above sentence follows all three conventions for ordering a series: logical order, number of syllables, and climactic rhetorical effect. We can easily say one goes from school to work, and the concept of citizenship is of a larger scope. “School” and “Work” are both one syllable each, and “democracy” is four syllables.

Seriously, remember this: you should know what rhetorical effects your choices have. Otherwise, this class is meaningless. Editing can be learned by practicing over and over again. Re-visioning takes a higher-level commitment to critical thinking.

If we need more examples for parallelism (available), you know I’ve got plenty online. That link takes us to a previous course, so make sure you’re able to navigate back. You aren’t required to follow that link, but you may want to for further practice.

Correlative Conjunctions

The previous discussion might have been a bit longer than needed, but I want you to understand the effects of parallel structures. You won’t always be able to have parallel structures, but you ought to try to have them. That will definitely show up on an exam…

I have a rather long discussion on a practical editing situation for the correlative conjunction not only—but also. That discussion is on using not only—but also in Video Games and American Culture.

Using Semicolons in Series

Use semicolons for a series that includes commas or other punctuation to improve clarity:

• Dates that live in infamy in the United States are April 12, 1861; December 7, 1941; and September 11, 2001.

Consider the rhetorical effect of these versions using a colon (or not using one):

• The following dates live in infamy in the United States: April 12, 1861; December 8, 1941; and September 11, 2001.
• Dates that live in infamy in the United States are the following: April 12, 1861; December 8, 1941; and September 11, 2001.
• Acts of terror against the United States happened on April 12, 1861; December 8, 1941; and September 11, 2001.

Semicolons are a marker of advanced writing. Of course, proper use is a marker of that. I would suggest not using them in journalistic writing or informal writing, but I wouldn’t ban their use in any genre. Having more awareness of available writing choices—including semicolons—as opposed to blanket rules against certain usage allows for more effective writing. {By the way, what’s the subject and verb of that sentence, and is it punctuated correctly?}

Moving Along to the Exercises

I hope you re-read this 36-page chapter. I won’t go over subject-verb agreement (Exercise #13 on p. 56), but it’s necessary to understand. Most of you seem to have that down, but it can be tricky for compound subjects. Do all the exercises in these chapters. In fact, your HOMEWORK #2 was to turn these in, so I hope you did that already.

p. 68: Group Discussion in Kolln & Gray

Let’s consider what the topic wishes to convey. Locate the dependent clauses in each of the 6 sentences on p. 68. You should also label them adverbial, adjectival, and nominal.

First, I want you to notice the difference between the three types of dependent clauses discussed in this section (pp. 66-68):

• adverbial clause
• adjectival clause
• nominal clause

Because those clauses have verbs or verb phrases and adverbial and nominal clauses often have subjects and verbs, we might be confused by what are the subject and verb of the sentence. Not recognizing or not clearly specifying what’s going on in the sentence is a major problem for editing. When you revise—your writing or someone else’s—make sure you know what the sentence is trying to communicate. Stringing together a series of subordinate clauses often has the effect of stretching the reader’s attention to what you actually want to get across in the very sentences you write. (Please recognize the irony of that previous sentence. Don’t model such prose.)

Below I’ve highlighted the dependent clauses and labeled the type: adverbial, adjectival, and nominal.

[I will add this in when we’re in class, so we can review together–submit your homework before class.]

Paragraph Revision

I majored in Economics and English at Virginia Tech. I did well in English but did poorly in Economics, which was in the Business College. After graduating, I pursued a Master of Science in Professional Writing at Towson University, where I had an excellent class on rhetorical grammar. That class provided a great foundation for analyzing the rhetoric of prose, a topic I enjoy. To further my intellectual goals, I went to the University of Louisville for my PhD in Rhetoric/Composition and wrote my dissertation on the rhetoric of Guglielmo Marconi’s wireless. Eventually, I revised and expanded that dissertation into my first book: Marconi’s Wireless and the Rhetoric of a New Technology.

112 words

I certainly could have made other choices, but this revision flows much better and conveys a more appropriate ethos of an English professor specializing in rhetoric and professional/technical writing. Some techniques above—adverbial and infinitive phrases—are covered in the next chapters of Kolln & Gray. The important thing to do is to compare the two paragraphs: they’re nearly exactly the same length (3 words more in the revision), but the revision seems more efficient and adds more information. The book title alone—not included in the original paragraph—is 9 words.

By the way, my dissertation title was this: Positioning Guglielmo Marconi’s Wireless: A Rhetorical Analysis of an Early Monumental Twentieth-Century Technology. That’s just pretentious! I’m glad someone suggested a much more efficient book title…we all could use another perspective for our writing choices, so, when you can, try to get someone else to look over your work.

Next Class

Continue with the reading. Remember, Barrett’s book is supplemental and reinforces mechanics. I’d rather spend time on rhetorical usage, but, of course, your exams will have questions from Barrett’s book. Next week, you’ll have HOMEWORK #3 due, but that won’t open up on Canvas until Sunday night. Of course, the Assignments Page has details.