Take my quiz

Take my quiz

So you think you know grammar, spelling, etc.? Here's a good chance to put your knowledge to the test. The answers are at the end ...

1) What rule of grammar dictates why we say "If I were a rich man" and not was?

   a) Conditional tense

   b) Predicate nominative

   c) The subjunctive

   d) It just sounds better

2) He did it for ...

   a) You and I

   b) You and me

   c) All of the above

   d) None of the above

3) The past tense of benefit is ...

   a) benefitted

   b) benefited

   c) benefit

   d) None of the above

4) Quick! Give me two pronouns!

   a) Jack and Jill

   b) Who, me?

   c) Me and Jimmy

   d) None of the above

5) You should _______ your pet when it does something

     you want it to do.

     a) complement

     b) compliment

     c) complament

     d) complimint

6) The dog wagged _____ tail.

    a) its

    b) it's
    

7) The couple is trying to sell ____ home.

   a) their

   b) its

   c) none of the above

8) Being labeled meticulous is a compliment.

    a) True

    b) False

9) He understood the ___________ of the situation as he took office.

   a) magnitude

   b) enormity
   c) either a or b
   d) none of the above


10) She was sentenced to two ___________ probation.
      a) years
      b) year's
      c) years'
      d) None of the above

11) John was the one _____ rescued us all.
     a) that
     b) who
     c) either a or b
     d) none of the above

12) __________ shall I say is sending the telegram?
   a) Who
   b) Whom

13) She writes better than _____.
   a) I
   b) me

14) Jim said he would let Lucy know if he ____ going to attend the play.
    a) were
    b) was

15) The performance will begin tonight at _______.
    a) 6
    b) 6 p.m.
    c) 6 in the evening
    d) all of the above

16) _____ are you taking to the dance?
   a) Whom
   b) Who

17) She was the student _____ perfect score was mentioned on the TV show.
   a) who's
   b) whose

18) He _____ known better.
  a) should of
  b) should have
  c) either a or b

19) This is Eyewitness News. For Jane and ____, thanks for watching.
    a) I
    b) me

20) The prisoner got his just ______.
   a) deserts
   b) desserts




Answers (I thought about briefly explaining each answer, but the post is long enough already. Message me if you are interested and I gladly will elaborate on any question):

1-C; 2-B; 3-B; 4-B; 5-B; 6-A; 7-B; 8-B; 9-A; 10-C; 11-B; 12-A; 13-A; 14-B; 15-A; 16-A; 17-B; 18-B; 19-B; 20-A



It's time to wrap it up. My next post will discuss datelines and why some locations stand alone (and what that means). Stay tuned ...

 

More mistakes you should avoid

More mistakes you should avoid

Here are more very common mistakes in writing and editing:


1) Always write noon and midnight,  never the outrageously confusing 12 a.m. or 12 p.m.


2) Includes is often used incorrectly. If you are talking about ALL of the items in a set, includes is wrong. When you say a list includes something, you are saying SOME of the list is about to be mentioned.


For example:

There are six people on the list, including Bill and Jill. Correct ...

There are three ingredients in the recipe, including sugar, milk and flour. Wrong ...

The quartet includes Bill, Bob, Jim and Sam. Wrong ...

The quartet includes famous actor Jim Carrey. Correct ...

When listing all, the correct way to write it would be that it features or consists of .... The set features blah blah, blah bluh and blah bleh ... The quartet consists of Bill, Bob, Jim and Sam.

3) There is no such thing as first annual. An event must have at least a one-year anniversary and take place a second time before it can be considered an annual event. The first time, call it "the inaugural (name of event) ..."

Likewise, if you understand the Latin root, annual refers to years and nothing else, so there is no such thing as a six-month anniversary, a three-week anniversary, etc. Instead, you might write a six-month observance or commemoration.

4) For those following AP style    and spelling out all numbers above nine: Numbers in the millions, billions and higher always take numerals at the beginning, as in 3 million, 6 billion, 1 trillion, etc. Don't think "three" (the one-nine rule) when you see "3 million" but instead the total number of 3 million, which is obviously much larger than one-nine.


5) Under the wasteful words category go these: three different varieties, a plan in place by Jan. 17 in order to receive, haven't reached an agreement yet ... in order is just two wasted words here. Same with different and yet. Delete 'em.



Lots of unnecessary words in stories don't contribute anything and take up precious space:

Terry Camper's body was found on Oct. 3.
He was serving prison time.
It's due in November of 2011.
They’re due back in court on Dec. 18.
Once again, the team rallied.

You don't need on in the first and fourth sentences: It was found Oct. 3, they'll be in court Dec. 18. In the second sentence, shorten it to a much simpler was in prison. In the third, of is needless. Just write November 2011. In the final sentence, once again is a nonsensical phrase. As opposed to twice again? Just say again. Once adds nothing. 


6) Entitled vs. titled. I saw this in a blog: The lyrics to the program, entitled "We Are All America" .. It should be titled here. Think of something due you when using entitled. She graduated, so she was entitled to a diploma. Think government entitlements. Think something is the title, not entitle, of a book, play, etc. The program was titled, not entitled.


7) Yet another example of something seen all time or in a similar construction: grades K-3.

It's a perfect example of what I have dubbed Parrot's 

Disease,   that habit of blindly copying what we see without ensuring it is correct.

This should be incredibly obvious but, incredibly, obviously isn't: Kindergarten is not a grade. Isn't that why first grade is called .... first grade? As in it's the first. So kindergarten can't possibly be a grade. And the construction should be kindergarten-grade three. And nowhere in any style file that I've ever read is k an acceptable abbreviation for kindergarten, so why is it used so frequently? Parrot's Disease!

8) The same idea applies to the oft-used 5K. At the very least, it should be 5-K with a hyphen, and on first reference absolutely you should spell out kilometer. Just like kindergarten, kilometer is not acceptable as an abbreviation, no matter how many times you've seen it that 

way. Parrot's Disease! 



9) Confusion over tenses:

  In the quarter ending Sept. 30 ...

For a story written Sept. 28 or Sept. 29, this would be correct, as ending indicates a present perfect condition in which the situation is ongoing, or has not been completed (sorry if this sounds too geekish). Such as "the company is conducting a blood drive all this week." It's ongoing, not finished, which is the function of the present perfect usage "--ing" here.



But for a story written Nov. 21, as this was, the tense is illogical. Read it aloud: On Nov. 21, the quarter isn't ending Sept. 30. Right? We all see that? It ENDED, past tense, Sept. 30. So it should be written as "In the quarter that ended Sept. 30."

Another common and WRONG way to write quarterly reports is to leave out key words and put caveman-like "In the quarter ended Sept. 30." The key is often to read what you write OUT LOUD. Nobody talks like that, and for good reason. It's stilted, ungrammatical and bad writing. It must be the quarter that ended ... not "the quarter ended" or "the quarter ending" when talking about a quarter that already has been completed.

Wikipedia happens to have a very good entry on present perfect that I highly recommend at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_perfect, but at least glance at this first paragraph from that entry here for a better understanding:

(from Wikipedia) The present perfect is a grammatical combination of the present tense and the perfect aspect, used to express a past event that has present consequences. An example is "I have eaten". Depending on the specific language, the events described by present perfects are not necessarily completed, as in "I have been eating" or "I have lived here for five years."

10) Over is overused and often used incorrectly. In general, it should be used to designate a spatial relationship, as in the carpet was placed over the floor, he turned over the cards, the soup boiled over, the next town over. It has many other uses as well, but for the most part it should NOT be used as a synonym for "during" or "more than," such as "over the weekend" and "he's over 40 and has over a million memories." 

The dictionary does list one of its meanings far down as "more than," but it should be avoided in general.




11) This may sound nitpicky, but many writers say someone "called 911." No, he didn't.   When you make a call, you call A PERSON or an organization, such as the police. You don't call "a number." You don't say, "Hang on; I have to call 914-234-6554  to see what my friend thinks." You say, "I have to call my friend." You DIAL 911, but you are CALLING the police. You don't call and say, "Let me speak to 911, please." That's just the quick number you use to talk to the police. So it should be in all cases dialed 911, not called 911.





12) Said is the best way to end virtually all quotes. Other words can slant things or intentionally or not create bias or doubt. 


"He has no signs of mental illness," he insisted, for example, instead of said here, changes the quote enormously and adds doubt, as if to say despite all obvious signs to the contrary, he is saying this. Same with roared, explained, noted, fumed, complained, etc. All give a quote a certain slant. "I am the best man for the job," he complained puts a particularly negative spin on a quote and makes him sound like a whining loser. 

Let the quotes speak for themselves and use said. 

Too bad if it sounds repetitive or dull. Studies have shown the readers blow right by the word and barely register it in their mind, so it's not some kind of turnoff seeing it after each quote. Their minds DO slam on the brakes, however, for loaded words like fumed, griped, complained, insisted, etc.




It's time to wrap it up. My next post will be a quiz to help you see where you stand as a writer/editor. Stay tuned ...  

 

Abusing center, last & next

Abusing center, last & next

 

Picture a target at an    archery range. You're about to launch an arrow toward the target. Where would you like the arrow to go?

Naturally, you want the arrow to hit that middle spot, the center (a noun). Converting center to a verb, you want the arrow to center .... around the intended target (the middle)? Of course not. You want to center it IN or ON the   middle.  

Nothing ever can center around anything else. Yet again, Parrot's Disease -- blindly parroting what we see -- prevails with one of the most frequent errors I encounter when editing stories. 

Repeat after me, please: It's not remotely logical and therefore is impossible for anything whatsoever to center around anything else. Now that you know, you'll never make that egregious goof again, right? You center ON, never around. 

Some examples of using it correctly:

The topic centered on how to evacuate the building safely during a fire.

His speech centered on the role of the CIA in the post-9/11 world.

The team's efforts centered on the quest to make the playoffs at all costs.

So how did the awful centers on become so prevalent? It's a phenomenon I have dubbed Parrot's Disease, that practice of accepting things blindly just because you've seen them often. My counsel is this: 

  Be skeptical and look things up to be sure! Do not trust myths and rumors or repeat things you have seen or heard, no matter how common. This is how such atrocious writing as the examples cited becomes so common. Be uncommon and be sure something you write is correct. Don't just parrot what you read and hear!

 

Repeat the following out loud to cleanse the evil around from your mind:

Centers on, centers on, centers on, centers on, centers on, centers on, centers on!

 ****

Next on the list is the insidious word last, nearly ALWAYS used incorrectly by writers and editors when referring to a previous event, day or date. In most cases, it's an empty word that adds nothing at best and massive confusion at worst. In lots of other cases, we truly mean past, not last.

A lot of it has to do with the jaw-dropping inability of far too many writers/editors to grasp the concept of what is called "writing for publication," which simply    means adapting your story to reflect WHEN it will be published. You don't write, for example, for print publication that the New York Yankees lost "today" in a story you are writing after the game ends. Why? Because the story won't appear in the printed edition until the next day, by which time the game will have taken place the day before. When the reader picks up his newspaper from his driveway and sits down to read it while eating breakfast, it will be the next morning, so you would write that the Yankees lost yesterday.

Sounds simple enough, right? Yet reporters are forever getting it wrong. On a recent Friday evening, I read a story about the New York Jets. It mentioned the performance of a player during last Friday's game against  

   some opponent. WRONG! By the time the story comes out on Saturday morning, last Friday will be the ... ready? ... last Friday before Saturday. Meaning the day the reporter wrote the story, one day before the story will actually appear in print. So when he or she writes "last Friday," he's wrongly telling the reader something took place the day before .... the last or most recent Friday.

Please don't send me any nonsensical retort about everyone "knowing what he meant." That's not nearly good enough. I could write the dogg chazed the kat and you'd know "what I meant." That wouldn't make such writing any less idiotic and unacceptable. Accuracy is by far the most important goal in journalism. Nothing else matters if what you publish is not accurate. It can be superbly written, entertaining, informative, timely, whatever -- and won't matter one bit if what you publish is inaccurate. Just ask a few disgraced journalists/authors who were caught lying and making up huge or   entire portions of their stories (Janet Cooke, James Frey and Jayson Blair are but three of many).

I can write the greatest article ever on Martians landing in Times Square, but who cares if what I write is not accurate?

So, the writer mentioning last Friday's game for a story that will appear Saturday morning needs to put the date, not last Friday, to be correct. For a story that was set for publication Saturday, Aug. 17, the writer should have written about the player's exploits "during the Aug. 9 game" ... not "last Friday's game," which incorrectly would refer to a game Aug. 16 (which wouldn't even have started yet, even if there was a game scheduled that day, when the reporter filed his story for Saturday publication).

In fact, nearly every reference to a previous event that uses that "last ..." construction is done incorrectly. Mostly because they're being inaccurate AGAIN and are referring to the wrong date. Even when they are pointing to the right date, it creates needless confusion. I'll explain why.

Example: A reporter writes in June that "a suspect was   arrested last March." This is wrong no matter what the intent is. In the overwhelming majority of such constructions that I have encountered as an editor, the reporter really means the March of the previous year. Somehow, in his/her mind, this constitutes the definition of last.

Um, NO IT DOESN'T. Get a dictionary and look up last.

 

For a story published in June 2013, "last March" refers to ...

a) March 2012

b) March 2013

If you hesitated for even a split second, I'm sorry to have to inform you that you need to look up the definition, too. The answer is March 2013 because it's the last (meaning most recent) March to have taken place since the day of publication (sometime in June of 2013).

Much, much better is to simply leave out the totally confusing word in the first place. "A suspect was arrested in March" for a story published in June makes it painfully clear that the arrest took place two months ago. It's also shorter, and anyone who works for a newspaper knows it's a constant battle to fit stories into the paper, so every word is precious. Don't waste them on superfluous (or even worse, inaccurate and/or misleading) words.

If the writer truly meant March 2012, that is exactly how he should write it for stories appearing in print in June 2013. It should say "a suspect was arrested in March 2012," not "last March."

The only time last makes sense in these constructions is when a story refers to something that took place exactly a week ago and you want to avoid confusion by making it clear you're talking about the previous day, not the day of publication.

Example: For a story that will be published Thursday morning, it might be acceptable to write that the president said "last Thursday" that the economy is improving so that readers don't think he said it the same day they are reading the story.

Another abuse of last: when we really mean past.

In the last six months implies an end-of-the-world    scenario such that those are the last months, as in the final months. We mean past, not last, here. Using last in such constructions incorrectly gives a sense of finality to something. When you are on the FINAL page of a book, then you can say it's the last page (exceptions would be references to your most immediate recent actions, such as the last page you read before going to bed or the last time you saw someone). When you eat the lone remaining cookie, then it's correct to say you ate the last cookie. You see the finality, the conclusiveness of last here?

But when the batter stepped to the plate the previous week, they're weren't his last at-bats unless he died, retired or was lost for at least the rest of the season with some injury. Understand? In his past (not last) six at-bats, Joe Schlabotnik has three doubles and a homer.

Some last constructions are OK: last night, last week, last month ...because in this case it refers to the single most recent previous moment in question, which is one of the correct definitions of last (see below). But it applies to singular items. It would be the past two months, the past two weeks, etc.

⁴last

adverb

Definition of LAST

1

: after all others : at the end <came last and left first>

2

: most lately <saw him last in Rome>

3

: in conclusion <last, let's consider the social aspect>

⁵last

adjective

Definition of LAST

1

a : following all the rest <he was the last one out>

b : being the only remaining <our last dollar>

2

: belonging to the final stage (as of life) <his last hours on earth>

3

a : next before the present : most recent <last week> <his last book was a failure>

b : most up-to-date : latest <it's the last thing in fashion>

4

a : lowest in rank or standing; also : worst

b : farthest from a specified quality, attitude, or likelihood <would be the last person to fall for flattery>

5

a : conclusive <there is no last answer to the problem>

b : highest in degree : supreme, ultimate

c : distinct, separate —used as an intensive <ate every last piece of food>

Many writers, for all the same reasons, don't fare any better using next, either.

I recently edited an article that mentions "next fall's Senate elections" when in fact next fall starts next month (September) and the elections in question occur in November 2014 ... definitely not next fall. 

In a story that is published on Monday, there is no reason to write that the game will take place next Wednesday. Just write that it will take place Wednesday. Why waste a word and possibly confuse readers into wrongly thinking you mean the Wednesday of the following week? It adds nothing and possibly creates confusion.

For a story published on Monday, Aug. 19, next Wednesday refers to Aug. 21. If we truly mean the Wednesday of the following week, we would need to write Aug. 28, not next Wednesday. It boggles my mind how often I've had conversations just like this with people who cannot grasp why they're incorrect.

Commit to being a lot better than that!

 

It's time to wrap it up. My next post will discuss a few more pet peeves not previously discussed. Stay tuned ...  

 

 

Poor spelling 'a gravy-stained tie'

Poor spelling 'a gravy-stained tie'

   The title for today's lesson comes from a column by James Kilpatrick, a longtime syndicated columist and expert on language. His column, appropriately, was called The Writer's Art.


His entry on spelling mentioned a financial consultant who sent a careless, error-riddled letter to a potential investor.  Kilpatrick highlighted some of the more egregious goofs, then wrote:

 "What impression do you suppose this illiterate letter made on the prospect? Not much. The prospect sent it to me with a note of incredulity."

Lest we forget, writing is simply a form of communication. It's a message you're trying to send, in whatever form, to another. What possible advantage is there to sabotaging the message with misspelled words, incoherent phrases, poor grammar and the like? For those who say we're being too snobbish and persnickety, how do these errors improve your communication in any way whatsoever? What do such errors tell the world about your education, your intelligence, even what you think of them when it's not even worth your time to check your message for proper spelling?



Even worse, what if it's a situation in which you are trying to impress someone? What if it's a letter you're sending to apply for a job? Kilpatrick addresses such concerns in his column after pointing out several examples of atrocious writing and spelling:

"There's no need to rub in a moral to the stories. In human and in business relationships, first impressions matter. If a first impression is poor, there may never be a second chance to make a better one. A poorly spelled letter is a gravy-stained tie."

Let's hope you agree with Kilpatrick and not the next two famous men:

"It is a damn poor mind indeed which can't think of at least two ways to spell any word."

    -- President Andrew Jackson

"I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way."

    -- Famous American author Mark Twain 

Those sentiments (I think they're joking but it doesn't matter) might have made some sense in the 19th century, when spelling still was perceived by many as a way to make your writing more individualistic. But they make no sense today, unless you're an unabashed anarchist and contrarian. 

Much closer to the truth about today's Twitter-warped generation are the sentiments of these two women:

"Sometimes, reading a blog, which I do infrequently, I see that generations of Americans have been willfully crippled, and can no longer spell or write a sentence."

      -- U.S. author Alice Walker 

"I'd like to run for office someday, but I'm afraid my ability to spell might give me an unfair advantage."

     -- April Winchell, U.S. actress, writer and talk show host 

 ****

Check out this individual's horrendous attempt to maintain some dignity after getting fired (courtesy of Media Bistro):


Fired KTVU Producer in Asiana Gaffe: 'My Hard-Earned Reputation Is Intack' (TheWrap / MediaAlley)
Three producers at the KTVU Fox affiliate in Oakland have lost their jobs over a racially offensive report of Asiana pilot names on a newscast about a crash landing that left three dead, and one of them insisted to TheWrap: "My hard-earned reputation is intack [sic]." Reached by TheWrap via email, investigative projects producer Roland De Wolk wrote: "My hard-earned reputation is intack. There are lawyers, so eager as I am to anser [sic] all questions, I must refrain." FishbowlNY Still. Of all the times to calibrate two separate sentences with two separate typos ... TheWrap's Sara Morrison goes on to write: "TheWrap presumes the spelling errors were unintentional." Ouch. 


Anyone want to lie to me and tell me his or her impression of Mr. De Wolk became MORE favorable after reading such atrocities???

This is perhaps a bit extreme as an example, but "close enough" doesn't exist when it comes to spelling, as this Connecticut eighth-grader learned the hard way when he put an extra t in an answer that otherwise was perfect on an episode of the TV quiz show "Jeopardy!":







His answer was ruled incorrect. Unfair, the boy whined to his local newspaper. Totally fair, a spelling bee expert countered.

"Spelling absolutely counts," Paige Kimble, executive director of the Scripps National Spelling Bee and the contest's 1981 champion, told USA Today. Indeed, in Thomas' case, spelling counted to the tune of thousands of dollars. "What we know is that good spelling is a tremendous reflection on an individual's overall knowledge and attention to detail. We love that 'Jeopardy!' took a stand."



 Other experts weigh in with comments in the same recent USA Today article about spelling, which I urge you to read at http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/people/2013/08/05/does-spelling-still-count-jeopardy-thomas-hurley-boy/2619957/.
 

1) "Spelling is as important as it's ever been," says J. Richard Gentry, an expert in reading and spelling education and the author of Spel is a Four-Letter Word. "I'm all in favor of treating spelling as seriously as it should be. It matters when a doctor writes a prescription and, apparently, when you have to write an answer on 'Jeopardy!' 


"Principals tell teachers you don't have to teach spelling because it's not on the state test," Gentry says. But "kids not taught spelling are not likely to do as well on the state reading and writing tests."


Moreover, he says, the latest neuroscience research suggests that the way young children learn to read and write might be constrained by the new ways of teaching, including the downgraded emphasis on learning to spell.



2) "We still evaluate people based on how we present ourselves in writing," says Mignon Fogarty, aka "Grammar Girl,"    an author of books on grammar and spelling and the founder of a popular website, Quick and Dirty Tips. "It suggests how detail-oriented you are, how rushed, how much care you put into your writing."



Spelling influences who Fogarty reads. "I follow a lot of writers of fiction and nonfiction on Twitter, and if I see a fiction writer who misspells a lot, I'm much less likely to give the books a try."


And even if the rules don't necessarily apply to texting teens, grownups are paying attention. "Employers are checking your Twitter feed and Facebook accounts when you apply for a job," she says.


3) "If you read the (official form) you signed, spelling really, really matters there," says Sandra Wilde, a Hunter College education professor and the National Council of Teachers of English elementary section chairwoman. She knows: She competed on "Jeopardy!" about 15 years ago, coming in second.


The contestant's error was arguably more about bad proofreading than bad spelling. During Final Jeopardy's 30-second answer window, "When the 'Jeopardy!' music is playing, that really is plenty of time. You can make a mistake and cross it out again," Wilde says. "It really is forgiving."

**** 

 

Now that we all agree that spelling is important, what are some ways in which we can become better spellers?

1) Read. Let me qualify that by saying read books, newspapers, most magazines, even SOME of the Internet (but certainly not 90% of what people post as replies to blogs or articles and 99.999% of what anyone scrawls on Twitter). Exposure to words is the way to learn how to spell them. Without a single exception, every classmate I knew in elementary, middle and high school who hated to read -- and boy, were there plenty of those -- was a poor (usually LOUSY) student and a horrible speller.

2) Think. Study. Reflect. Don't just blindly accept idiotic words like donut, nite, lite, etc., as correct and then parrot them, the way so much of the world does. Go at least two steps better than village idiot, please.

3) Avoid constant exposure to misspelled words. The reason I advocate voracious reading is that our brains are wired to acquire the ability to spell words by seeing them -- over and  over -- and making a mental catalog. That's largely how we develop good spelling habits -- we see a word that doesn't match what is in that catalog and our brain says, "That looks wrong!"


But constantly seeing words mangled (the way they are so frequently in tweets and those reply posts at the end of articles or blogs on the Internet) warps the catalog and confuses our brain. As an example, I'd strongly urge using only lists of correctly spelled words to improve your spelling, not a list of commonly misspelled words. Or at least have that list contain only the correct versions of such commonly misspelled words.

4) Saying the word out loud and being sure to pronounce it correctly also help form an indelible image in your mind via another sense (sound). I'm always amazed by the number of people who confuse words and spell atrociously because in their mind the word they're using has a sound different from the reality. If you somehow think the proper way to pronounce the word is "nuke-a-lerr," (sorry, Mister President!), chances are good you may not know how to spell nuclear correctly, either. 

*** Although I recommend you do so sparingly and with caution, there are times when intentionally changing the pronunciation (for your own internal use, not in conversations or writing!) can help you spell a word. For example, I always pronounce sergeant as "serge-eee-ant" because phonetically the word sounds like "sarge-ent." I pronounce vegetable as vedge-eh-tayble, not vedge-

tuh-bull, Chihuahua as "Chee-who-a-who-a" and not "Chee-wah-wah" and colonel as "koll-oh-nell" and not the insane pronunciation "ker-nell" and bologna as "bow-logg-nuh" and not the even more insane "buh-lone-eee."

If that confuses you more than it helps, ignore that advice. But I find it very helpful for words that don't sound the way they are spelled.

5) Use ... a... DICTIONARY! You'd think this would be obvious. If you don't have one, get one -- at a used bookstore if you must, but have one at your disposal. Or at the very least consult a reliable online dictionary such as Merriam-Webster.com. 


And be sure to use that dictionary often! Kilpatrick concludes his column on spelling by urging just that and also by making a similar plea to avoid what I have dubbed Parrot's Disease:
   

      "When in doubt about the spelling of a word, look it up! And stay in doubt!"

6) Learn associations that help you remember. Some of those are called mnemonic devices. I'll always spell accommodate correctly because someone taught me this: It's big enough to accommodate two c's and two m's. There are many, and you can invent your own. Just a few worth noting to give you an idea: Super Man Helps Everyone as a way (I like using HOMES better here) to remember the Great Lakes   Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie and Ontario; 30 days hath September, April, June and November; I before E except after C or when sounding like A in neighbor and weigh; KISS (keep it simple, stupid); and RICE for the instructions for treating a sprain (Rest the injured area, Ice the sprain, Compress with a wrap or bandage, Elevate the injured area).


7) Learn a foreign language, or even better more than one.  We first learn our native language by hearing it as children. We don't learn it by first studying rules and such. When you learn another language in school, however, or even on your own, you learn proper forms of conjugating verbs, of making words plural, of handling irregular verbs, of using correct grammar in structuring sentences, etc. 


You then can apply all that to your native tongue. It will give you a much, much better understanding of how to speak and write properly, and the key to learning anything is to understand what you're learning. When you learn other languages, you then learn a lot about your own language. And that can only help in efforts to spell correctly.


8) Study the roots of words and common prefixes and suffixes, the way spelling bee contestants do, and words that used to be bizarre and strange to your eyes will become familiar and easy to remember. It's like cracking a code of sorts. For example, once you understand endings (suffixes) like -ous, -ible/-able, -ious, -ology, -tion and -ity, you'll be able to spell words with such endings and understand what they mean much better.


Etymology also can be very helpful. I find it fascinating exploring the origin of certain words or phrases, but even if you think it's boring it still will help you learn to be a better speller if you learn how words came to be. I extremely highly recommend it. One fun place to start is at
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php.


Just a few examples that I hope will spark some interest:
* Did you know that a "chauvinist" wasn't originally some person with a bias against the other gender (as in "male chauvinist pig") but simply someone especially devoted to a certain cause or person? It stems from Nicolas Chauvin, 


  a soldier in the French army who was particularly devoted and attached to Napoleon. Many expressions come from similar derivations of proper names: slave, bohemian, platonic, manila, pasteurization, quixotic, mesmerize, etc.  


* Yet another reason to learn foreign languages: Many common words and expressions used in English originate from other languages: shish kebab, coup, hors d'oeuvre, loco, bona fide, doppelganger, hoi polloi, pro bono, nota bene, zeitgeist, kayak, squash, toboggan, haiku, origami, etc.


* Many common expressions in English come from either the 
Bible or the works of William 


Shakespeare,   two sources I extremely highly urge you to read. Guess which one these come from? "The writing on the wall," "Neither a borrower nor a lender be," "A man after mine own heart," " a fool's paradise," "a labor of love," "a sea change," "All's well that ends well," "fair play," "foul play," "a peace offering," "wild goose chase," "a two-edged sword," "love is blind" and "a wolf in sheep's clothing." Look them up to find the fascinating answers and origins of those phrases. I'm not going to do all the work for you!

9) Learn from other good writers as well as Internet sites that promote spelling, grammar, writing, etc. For example, I highly urge you to read the syndicated columns of Pulitzer Prize winner Leonard Pitts, who works at the Miami Herald. I think he is easily the best columnist in the United States as far as writing ability is concerned (I'm not talking about viewpoints or power of persuasion but merely his skill as a superb writer). James Kilpatrick   died three years ago today (I didn't know that when I started this post, but it makes the post a nice tribute), but you can find some of his work on the Internet. He also wrote several books, including "The Writer's Art," based in part on his columns of the same name. It's probably at your library.

There are plenty of others. And plenty of good Internet sites. Here are just a few worth exploring:
http://www.grammarly.com/

http://grammar.yourdictionary.com/

http://www.dyslexia.org/spelling_rules.shtml 

10) Above all, recognize that it DOES matter. Just as you'd be foolish to attend a job interview in dirty, torn pants, a shirt missing several buttons and that gravy-stained tie, it's equally foolish to not even care how uneducated and 

ignorant you come across   when you can't spell basic words and/or put their when you mean there or your when you mean you're. 

It's time to wrap it up. My next post won't center around anything and will highlight past, not last, mistakes. If you don't know what I mean, you'll just have to stay tuned ...