What Editors Really Think Of Creative Usage
Disclaimer: I’m actually the only editor whose thoughts are being discussed in the following discourse.
Ralph Waldo Emerson said, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” When I read that in Stan Carey’s article on MacMillan Dictionary questioning the unfounded rules we as writers and editors impose on ourselves and others within our power, I told him he’d made the argument I’d been searching for to back this post. I’d like to push Stan’s question a little farther into declaration territory.
Here’s the refrain from Lewis Carroll’s Jabberwocky:
‘Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
About this verse, Carroll says in the preface to The Hunting of the Snark:
As this poem is to some extent connected with the lay of the Jabberwock,
let me take this opportunity of answering a question that has often been
asked me, how to pronounce “slithy toves.” The “i” in “slithy” is long,
as in “writhe”; and “toves” is pronounced so as to rhyme with “groves.”
Again, the first “o” in “borogoves” is pronounced like the “o” in
“borrow.” I have heard people try to give it the sound of the “o” in
“worry”. Such is Human Perversity.
I was grateful for Carroll’s guidance, but the real questions begged here are, “What in the world is a slithy tove? Why must a borogove be pronunced that way?” But Carroll leaves them maddeningly unanswered. Reading his work is much like reading a Mad Lib: every sentence is in its proper construction, but none is quite “right.”
Though I doubt any of us imagine we’re going to that extreme, I see instances of it every day. One major example is the word “friend.” It’s an old noun, passed down over time to mean many warm and fuzzy kinds of people, and now it’s a verb that means “get off my back, I’ve done it!” too.
As an editor who’s surrounded by the safe and sane classics of writing guidance, I was much taken aback at first. How could a soulless, money-grubbing business get millions of people to help it chase and wrestle a word down and hold it there while attaching a new meaning–a new place in the lexicon–to its belt? Surely this was heresy in any court of usage.
I was admittedly young and therefore complicit in the pressing of the colon, semicolon, and right parenthesis into the slave-labor production of trillions of smileys. Although they’re commonplace now and I guess few people my age knew what else to use colons and semicolons for, it was a quieter revolution than most, but still.
But what rules were broken in the example above? What crime was committed? On a purely word-by-word basis–with no analysis of the state of our world’s communication, its level of literacy, or the conspiracy of the ignorant to send us all to the crazy house–it’s perfectly permissible to create new furrows in the path of language. It’s permissible whether I like where it leads or not. Qualifiers and restrictions will abound and apply.
Yet I must confess I had a feeling very much akin to jealousy when I saw hashtags on Twitter for the first time. It couldn’t really have been jealousy because I can count on my hands the number of times I’ve used them among my thousands of tweets. But it was close. As a user of the language as well as its guardian–as a person who observes much more language than I use myself–it reminded me that language is a beast we can ride but not control, no matter how desperately we want and try to. It was the wildness of it I envied even as I thought, our beast is alive and healthy, hobgoblins and all. And that made me smile.
I’ll bet that’s what Carroll’s editors did, too, by the end of Jabberwocky. Although, knowing editors, he’d never get away with a hashtag.
Photo credit: Random House Audio, courtesy of Flickr, CC 2.0.
Enter your email to get random special notes from me about marketing copy, language, and grammar you can put to work as soon as you read them. It’s not a newsletter–it’s your chance to pull me aside for answers to your own questions, too!
Sara Thurston Wow, I didn't know @ used to mean "each," Sara. I think I joined the writing fray when it meant "at," and haven't had a reason to use it to mean anything else. I always thought the traditional "symbol" for "each" was just the abbreviated "ea." Thanks for making me smarter!
Shakirah, I was just lamenting today about the way people or groups "take over" a word and change its meaning. Today I learned there's a new meaning for the word "swag." Yesterday it was "muffin." (Gross! The newer definition of gross, of course.)I remember when my then-6-year-old daughter came home from school and asked me what "screw" meant. I showed her one from the tool chest. She looked at me quizzically and asked, "Then why did the 5th graders say I screw teddy bears?" I told her they must be stupid children, poor things. Stupid children with lazy parents. (Sorry. I was angry.) The long, LONG list of words and symbols whose meanings have changed annoys me. This must be one of those signs of aging I've been hearing about all my life. I'm getting cranky about silly things like this.
~Michelle for New England Multimedia
I'm also very annoyed that @Livefyre is still removing my paragraph breaks. But I'm going to let it go and breathe.
New England Multimedia livefyre Swags are muffins? That's a new one! Screw's a bit old, of course (waaaay too old for 6-to 10-year-olds). It's hard to keep up, but I actually kind of enjoy watching it, and seeing what kinds of meanings "stick" and which sort of shrug off certain usages. A large percentage of the "standard" words--and even symbols--that we use nowadays had totally different meanings and pronunciations over the years, and they'll probably change again. It can certainly be disconcerting!
LOL! No, "swags" aren't "muffins." Not yet, at least! ;) I meant that the day before, I'd learned there was a new (and not nice) meaning for "muffin." I was trying last week to explain to a 98-year-old what "text" means now. At least we can see where THAT new definition comes from! ;)
New England Multimedia Oh, whew! Although I don't want to know what muffin means now--muffin-tops alone are off-putting enough. I wish I were listening in on that conversation with the 98-year-old!
Shakirah - I'm confused. Can you give an example of how the word friend is used like a verb to mean "get off my back, I've done it."
Your own diction in this post is superb. It shows again just how brilliant a writer you really are, and how fortunate your clients are to have you as an editor. You have such a finely tuned ear for the cadence of the language.
And I believe I sympathize with the feeling with you've expressed here. My husband and his daughter are namers. Before I met them, I thought these were mythical beings invented by fanciful writers like Neil Gaiman (if you've never read the Anansi Boys, pick it up on the cheap at a used bookstore- memorable line {my paraphrase} - "Fat Charlie Nancy was only ever fat for about 8 months when he was 14. But the name stuck, because it was given to him by his father. And that's the way it was with his father.")
Not so - these two can name and rename any person, cat, dog, celebrity, object, whatever! that crosses their path. And it's apt, and it's funny, and it sticks. And sometimes their name even endows attributes, changes people's perceptions. It's the weirdest thing I've ever seen. They have a linguistic power that no scholar, no editor, no writer of a style guide will ever know. And that's why language is awesome, in the ancient sense of that word.
corpwritingpro Thanks for the compliment, Michelle--coming from you, it means a lot to me. I'm defining friend the way a lot of us define it: as a verb meaning we've pressed a button to acknowledge the merits of something or someone or some establishment. My own sneakily sarcastic humor shows up in the "get off my back" part because often on social media people ask for or expect to be friended for whatever reason...
I know a few "namers" myself (now I know what to call them!), and yes: the first name they use always seems to stick! Some people find them annoying; I find them endearing and daring. The funniest part is they often don't even realize the power they're wielding.
ShakirahDawud
I love it! To friend - I'm adding it to my own private dictionary. Very cool! It makes me wonder how we should (re)define "like": 1) I've read and acknowledged your comment; 2) I'm skimming this post and randomly hitting every button I see; 3) this made me laugh, think, cry, sit up and take notice; 4) I've fallen asleep and lost control over my wrist; 5) I haven't seen you in 20 years and want you to validate my self-esteem and the fact that I've recently lost weight ...
And I agree about the namers. Jessika, my stepdaughter, brazenly called me by my full, first initial-middle-and-last previously married name for about 5 years after I married her dad. The day she switched to Baker I knew a sea change had been made.
corpwritingpro Lol, that is a riot--and it must have been a real shift in your relationship as she saw it, too!
Actually, "friend" the verb, with the kind of definition I sarcastically paraphrased, was just added to Oxford Dictionary: http://english.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/friend?region=us&rskey=p6zF0N&result=2#m_en_us1249121.006 Just skim down to the verb form. So that wrestling match that ended with a new meaning for the word? Yes, it did happen!
corpwritingpro And the fifth meaning of "like"--I'll take it! Thanks for the laughter!





"it’s perfectly permissible to create new furrows in the path of language. It’s permissible whether I like where it leads or not."
I love the way you described this. One of the most beautiful things about the English language is its ability to try different flavors, discarding the ones that don't work and assimilating the keepers to create something new and delicious.
I remember a constant battle with a client over the term "24/7." In just four characters, it described the availability of customer support or business hours. She resisted, and I had to settle for "we are open all day and all night," or some such variation. Now the term has not only been accepted, but expanded to "24/7/365."
And "@," which used to mean "each," is undergoing its own endurance test. This is probably the reason that the English dictionary is so much fatter than those of many other languages. I love it!
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like