![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Grammar tip of the day
Because I use these A LOT in my technical writing, thought it might be useful for others out there.
i.e. = "that is" (or, "in other words")
e.g. = "for example"
Memory trick: Imagine that i.e. means “in essence,” and e.g. sounds like "egg sample."
Also, since I'm thinking of it, American dialogue attribution punctuation/capitalization, which only has a few variations but is something people get endlessly wrong. (For American English, punctuation is always within the quotes. Commas before attribution (she said), periods before non-attribution (actions other than saying, asking, exclaiming, etc.).)
"I say," she said.
"I say!" she exclaimed.
"I say?" she asked.
"I say," she said, "this is ridiculous."
"I say." She turned to me and stuck her tongue out. "This is ridiculous."
i.e. = "that is" (or, "in other words")
e.g. = "for example"
Memory trick: Imagine that i.e. means “in essence,” and e.g. sounds like "egg sample."
Also, since I'm thinking of it, American dialogue attribution punctuation/capitalization, which only has a few variations but is something people get endlessly wrong. (For American English, punctuation is always within the quotes. Commas before attribution (she said), periods before non-attribution (actions other than saying, asking, exclaiming, etc.).)
"I say," she said.
"I say!" she exclaimed.
"I say?" she asked.
"I say," she said, "this is ridiculous."
"I say." She turned to me and stuck her tongue out. "This is ridiculous."
no subject
no subject
no subject
You say "in American English", is this different in English from England, or are you just not sure?
no subject
I've always put it inside the quotations, because although 'I say," he said.' is technically only one sentence, it feels a bit like two and the quotations are part of the first sentence. (This makes total sense in my head!)
no subject
ETA: But
no subject
ETA: But
no subject
no subject
He described the monster as "slimy, not gooey"; we agreed.
Whereas I believe in US English it would be
He described the monster as "slimy, not gooey;" we agreed.
I don't know if US English distinguishes between
He said it was "gross!" and He said it was "gross"!
To me, in the latter the exclamation mark is reacting to his statement, not to the grossness of it.
no subject
I read the difference between those two sentences similarly to you, but in American English, the only "correct" way would be to have the exclamation point inside the quotes. That said, because I understand the difference, I have actually used the UK/NZ version before, even though it'd be wrong by American English rules. (I do that a fair amount, I find, if something makes sense to me - e.g. not necessarily using the direct address comma if it screws up the way the statement sounds when I'm reading it).
no subject
Would that also be true for a question mark?
I've grown used to putting full-stops and commas inside the quotes, but I struggled a bit before I acquiesced to my beta's recommendation that a semi-colon should be inside, and I'd baulk entirely at a question mark. It changes the meaning!
no subject
Yeah, unfortunately, according to American English, all punctuation must be inside the quotes. That said, I flagrantly ignore that when it suits me (like when it changes the meaning of the thing) and I think a lot of people (especially fiction writers) do as well.
no subject
"He said it was 'gross!', not me," she said. "I don't think it's gross at all. I like it."
Instead of:
'He said it was 'gross'! not me,' she said.
If the exclamation point is outside the quotes, then it's modifying everything before it and not just the quote. I don't know if that's the grammar rule, but that's how I remember which way it works.
I'm forever going to use 'egg sample' to remember e.g. anyway. I love little memory tricks like that.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I love little memory tricks like that tooooooooo!
Hihihihi! <3
no subject