Friday, August 18, 2006

The Jounalistic SP Times Priesthood Sinks Davis, Exalts Smith, Cuffs Around the English Language


St. Petersburg Times Gentlemen Editorial-board

(I bet you all are) Pooh-bahs and suchlike Zeus personae of your paper's y-chromosome-weighted Olympian caste system:


Your Sunday endorsement essay (included below) on Smith and Davis is not bad. It represents little rhetorical felicity: no vivid diction, no sophisticated structure, no startling insights. It's meat-and-potatoes style provides homely fare. But I have seen The NY Times editorial grandees do worse.


That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers provided by the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world. Y’all, I bet, get Chinese in the cafeteria with plastic forks.


Considerate writing demands that you acquaint yourselves with hyphens. They help readers understand a sentence when you use them before a noun preceded by words used as a single adjective.

You did not disgrace yourselves with passive verbs, but you’re not on the wagon with them yet. They make what you say sound duplicitous and weak—both of which readers suspect anyway. And passive verbs are always wordier than active verbs. Rid your writing of pussy-footing passive verbs, and you will ascend to Grub Street paradise and hang out with Mencken.


You can get away with an idiomatic “it” or two, but you must be solicitous enough of your readers to provide the word you mean instead of resorting to broad-pronoun reference. Readers shouldn’t have to do your work for you and ponder what fugitive antecedent the writer means.


Diction forensics--“charismatic”; “courageous”; “solid” -- betray your real reason for favoring Smith: This is a guy’s guy, a farm-boy macho specimen whom you would invite into Mystic Krewe’s sweat lodge in the middle of the clearing, not to smoke rabbit tobacco, which every Georgia farm girl such as I knows intimately, but to smoke roll-your-own Prince Albert’s because that is what Smith first contaminated his lungs with behind the barn.


Had any--or at least more--women huddled on the endorsement vote, Davis might have prevailed. We women know that Smith is the type who slaughters and eats a horse at one sitting, then grooms his teeth with the toothpick he hacks from the beast’s hoof. He’s Rocky.


But Davis is poetic Jimmy Stewart, a romantically thin ecotomorph for whom we women prepare a hearty meal and coax the lad to eat some, even a little, to keep up the dear fellow’s strength. He’s Ashley Wilkes in Gone with the Wind, whom Scarlett loved and lost to a goody two shoes Melanie. In real life, the choreograph is the opposite.


Besides, to top his list of pluses, Davis has a wife named Peggy. No more redolently attractive wife’s name exists. Were I advising Davis, I would suggest that all his billboards say simply,“My wife’s name is Peggy.” Everybody loves and trusts a Peggy—especially we women.


No woman named Peggy ever blabs your secrets or tattles that she spotted you at the beauty parlor looking like hell coming out from under the drier. We trust Peggys. And most voters are women. And, hurrah, we outlive the stronger sex. Na, na, na.


I bestow a B- on this essay and advise you to see me in my office after class.


lee drury de cesare, sporadic reader, constant critic


St. Petersburg Times: Smith for the Democrats


Sunday, August 13


(St. Petersburg Times Editorial Board) Both Rod Smith and Jim Davis have solid records of service. But Smith has the leadership style needed to bring both parties together.


Democrats have an opportunity this year to restore some measure of political balance to Tallahassee, and they need to be smart about how they approach it. Their challenge in the Sept. 5 primary is to select the candidate best positioned to reclaim the Governor's Mansion and deal with a Republican-controlled Legislature Don’t capitalize “legislature.” while advancing a political philosophy that could be embraced by moderate Floridians Avoid passive verbs. They make your writing sound weak.”…that moderate Floridians can embrace…”regardless of party affiliation. It No antecedent: Try “the choice.” is a close call, but in our judgment state Sen. Rod Smith of Alachua is the candidate who can best make the case for change in November and then steer this state back toward the middle.


Both Smith and U.S. Rep. Jim Davis of Tampa have solid records of public service. They each can articulately Dump redundant adverb: Strunk & White. list the shortcomings of the Jeb Bush era: Too Use lower case “c”: you don’t have a complete sentence after the colon. many tax breaks, an education system that relies too heavily on standardized testing, an obsession with privatizing government services and a failure to effectively: Dump in memory of Strunk & White deal with the property insurance Hyphenate. crisis.


At the same time, it is hard to find significant policy differences between the two Democrats. Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.”support [for]preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales tax hyphenated “sales-tax” exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts. Both have plans to raise teacher salaries and transform the FCAT into a diagnostic tool to help students rather than punish schools. Both oppose altering the class size hyphenate amendment, changing the state Constitution to allow tuition vouchers and altering the Save Our Homes hyphenate amendment in ways that could exacerbate inequities or decimate local government budgets.


While both candidates have proposals for dealing with the property insurance hyphenate crisis, Smith's is more comprehensive and ambitious. While Davis' Davis’s : If you can pronounce the extra syllable, add apostrophe “s.”overall environmental record is a bit cleaner than Smith's, the state senator pledges to fulfill the state's commitment to clean up the Everglades and to enforce growth management hyphenate laws. We will hold him to his word - and expect him not to be co-opted by support from Big Sugar Passive verb is weak: “and expect him not to let Big Sugar co-opt him.” in the same way Bill McBride, the Democratic nominee four years ago, was controlled by the teachers unions. “…the teachers’ unions controlled Bill McBride.”

The choice between Smith and Davis boils down to electability and the ability to govern. In style, temperament and experience, Smith is best suited: Comparative “better suited”: you have only two. to make the case that the Democrats' values match mainstream Florida and to bring real change in Tallahassee. The son of a farming family of modest means who graduated from the University of Florida law school, he was a labor lawyer in private practice until he defeated an incumbent Gainesville-area Republican state attorney in 1992. His successful prosecution of Danny Rolling for the Gainesville student murders should insulate him from the soft-on-crime attacks usually launched by Republicans. But Smith also can cite among his accomplishments as a prosecutor creating innovative special units to go after environmental crimes and crimes against women.


In 2000, Smith won a north Florida state Senate seat formerly held by a Republican. He has carved out his own middle ground, often supporting the rights of gun owners and agricultural interests while also pushing legislation to help single parents collect child support, close ineffective boot camps for juveniles, provide more money to help abused children and expand the availability of health care and prescription drugs.


Most importantly, Smith has repeatedly demonstrated he is a charismatic leader who can bring together Democrats and Republicans to take courageous stands under enormous pressure. He helped lead a coalition of senators who refused to let Bush and the Legislature no capital defy the courts and interfere with Terri Schiavo's constitutional right to have her end of life hyphenate wishes carried out. This past legislative session, Smith held another bipartisan group together that prevented the Republican leadership from trying to restore tuition vouchers that the Florida Supreme Court had found unconstitutional. He did the same thing to make sure voters weren't confronted with a convoluted proposal to gut the class size hyphenate amendment. In an era when extreme partisans define…both political parties… both major political parties are often defined by their most extreme partisans, Florida needs a governor who can reach across party lines and lead by consensus.


Davis has a solid record as an ethical, thoughtful state legislator and congressman who understands the challenges facing Florida. Smith combines the same grasp of those challenges with a more dynamic leadership style and a clearer, fresher record of building mainstream coalitions that can successfully redundant modifier. Listen to Strunk & White.carry the day on tough issues. “That” is vague reference: “That record.” is what it will take for a Democrat to win in November and successfully redundant modifier govern in Tallahassee.


The Times Why does The Times not observe the protocol of treating a newspaper as a book and italicize? Is the problem newspaper rebellious idiom, or is the problem ignorance? recommends Rod Smith for the Democratic nomination for governor.


Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together.

****************************************************************************
And as a Senator I led the charge to advance biomass-based ethanol fuel production, and worked to secure funding for the University of Florida's Center for Renewable Chemicals and Fuels.

No comma between a compound verb
ldd


Go to Study Hall, Candidate Smith; and don't leave until you have comma rules down cold and can teach them to the Poynter expert in writing, Dr. Roy Peter Clark. Start with the basics. He'll be a hard case. He heads a faculty of nearly all men.


Your RodSquad Page

Women For Smith

RodTV

Join the Rod Squad

Get Smart

Get Active

Get Talking

12 Comments:

Blogger Matt said...

It's [sic] meat-and-potatoes style provides homely fare. But I have seen The NY Times editorial grandees do worse.

Well done, Lee. In your first paragraph you make one of the most boneheadedly stupid errors of all time. The NY times editorial may do worse, but you ex-teachers of English with twenty-eight years' experience really take the cake.

I'm scared to read on.

4:36 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.” support [for] preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales tax hyphenated “sales-tax” exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.<

Are you serious?

Davis's and Smith's support for preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales-tax exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.

In the original "support" is a verb. Your revised version (with "support" as a noun attributed to Davis and Smith) is a sentence fragment.

Didn't you learn in your twenty-eight years of teaching that a sentence needs a finite verb? Perhaps not.

5:00 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together.<

My goodness, Lee. "Specimen" (the complement of "is") is also the subject of "shows". This must be one of the most ridiculous sentences you have ever churned out in your ranting.

Try:

Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below that shows that birds of a feather flock together.

or:

Another reason that the SPTimes editors favor Le Smith is the specimen below, showing that birds of a feather flock together.

or, better still:

Say "no" to cheap drugs that affect your writing.

5:15 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>They help readers understand a sentence when you use them before a noun preceded by words used as a single adjective.<

Oh, go on. Fix your limp passive verb for me. I'll let you decide how.

5:21 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers provided by the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world.<

More passive verbs. Try:

That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers that the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world provides.

Now, Lee, why didn't you think of that? Or does avoiding limp passive verbs apply only to others when you're dishing it out?

4:06 AM  
Blogger twinkobie said...

Heavens, I didn't know I had a fan. Thanks for your anal-retentive attention, Matt. Let me riposte, old sweetie.

The "it's" represents the revenge of the spellchecker. But gloat if you wish. You are right. Don't use "boneheadedly." It's a redundant adverb. "Stupid" is sufficient. Strunk & White would rap your knuckles. Avoid cliches such as "take the cake." They make you sound stale, dear one. (continued)

8:06 AM  
Blogger twinkobie said...

Matt: >Davis and Smith Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.” support [for] preserving abortion rights, reviewing sales tax hyphenated “sales-tax” exemptions and creating an independent commission to redraw legislative and congressional districts.<

Me: No, I don't need separate possession. These guys supported the project together.Your "support" needs a capital. It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree. My sentence fragment was a green pony to see if you were awake.

Matt: Didn't you learn in your twenty-eight years of teaching that a sentence needs a finite verb? Perhaps not.

Me: I want you to write me an essay on "finite" verbs. You are trying to use flossy terms that would have confused my students just to make you look learned. I told the dears that a sentence needs a verb that shows time.Talk American, Matt. Since we are being picky, "Perhaps not" is a fragment. Don't try that old "elliptical clause" flim flam on me to weasel out of this grammar felony.

Your "birds of a feather" comment has the period mark outside the quotation marks at the end. Only if one lives in Great Britain must it go outside.

Me: One can omit "that" ("specimen below" comment) if it is not the subject of the subordinate clause. The complement of "reason" is not "specimen"; the complement of "reason" is the noun clause "[that] the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together."

I do not "churn out" sentences, Matt. I craft them. I do not "rant"; I deliver remarks in measured tones of relentless logic. You've a tin ear, young man.

Do you suggest I take drugs? I haven't yet but am considering ingesting hallucigens to induce grammar ecstasy.

>They help readers understand when you use them before a noun preceded by words used as a single adjective.<

Me: I have no passive verb in this sentence, sirrah. I have a past participial phrase.That phrase is adjectival. A verb must be finite, Matt. You pressed that wisdom upon me.

Me: >That paper’s cozened denizens doubtless get lamb chops and baby asparagus for lunch in chambers provided by the dumbest publisher in the newspaper world.<

Me: You again mistake past participial phrases for verbs. These act adjectivally as they did in my previous sentence. You tilt with grammar windmills and show you don't know the difference between finite verbs and participial phrases.

Matt: Now, Lee, why didn't you think of that? Or does avoiding limp passive verbs apply only to others when you're dishing it out?

Me: "That" has no antecedent, Matt. Neither does "it" in your cliche "dishing it out." Your synapses have burned out.

I see from the time stamps that I deal with a critter who sits in front of his CRT screen at four in the morning. Doubtless you are a farmer in the grammar badlands of Iowa or some other rural fastness at the end of the civilized world.

What you must comprehend, Festus, before you issue forth to slop the hogs is that if we are to play this grammar game,there is a major rule for you to observe: What in others is a grave character flaw in me is a charming foible.

Chew on that, Mr.Carper Darper. And go feed those hogs. Today is harvesting day for the North Forty.

lee drury de cesare, Gulf of Mexico, Florida

9:10 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

The great grammargrinch blames the spellchecker for her error! Wow!

Lee, I’m short for time right now. I’ll respond later to your many wonderful points.

I’ve chewed on that which you suggested, and I thank you for clarifying your double standard.

While you’re waiting for my reply, chew on the following.

Your original stance:

>Davis’s and Smith’s: You need separate possession before “support.”<

Your current stance:

>Me: No, I don't need separate possession. These guys supported the project together.Your "support" needs a capital. It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree.<

Lee, I was quoting you. You’ve jumped in and corrected the amendment you made in your earlier post. Make up your mind.

>It begins a sentence or a fragment or a partridge in a pear tree.<

“It” has no antecedent. If you cannot remember my previous sentences to establish an antecedent, why should I have to do so when reading yours?

6:30 PM  
Blogger Matt said...

Sorry to keep you waiting. I had a lot of hog pens to slop out.

I could write an essay, but I’d rather just quote a source. Strunk and White is no use; let’s try Nesfield.

The forms of the different Participles are as follows: -

Transitive verbs

Present or continuous
Loving (Active voice)
Being loved (Passive Voice)

Past indefinite
Loved (Passive Voice)

Past Perfect
Having loved (Active voice)
Having been loved (Passive Voice)


Intransitive verbs

Present or continuous
Fading

Past indefinite
Faded

Past Perfect
Having faded

....

Since a Participle is a verb as well as an adjective, it can take an Object, which may be of five different kinds.

Having shot the tiger, he returned home. (Direct Object)

He is busy, teaching his sons Greek. (Indirect Object)

Having been taught Greek, he was a good scholar. (Retained Object)

We saw him fighting a hard battle. (Cognate Object)

Having sat himself down, he began to eat. (Reflexive Object)


All your participial phrases start with a past indefinite participle in the passive voice. A participle is still a verb; it still tells time (as you told your little cherubs). I never maintained that participles are finite verbs; you are putting words in my mouth, dearie.

Now, perhaps you could write me an essay on how

… chambers provided by the dumbest publisher …

is any less flabby than

… chambers that are provided by the dumbest publisher … .

They’re both written in the passive voice. If you want to believe that all your participles introducing your participial phrases are not verb forms used in the flabby old passive voice, that is your prerogative.

Lee: A verb must be finite, Matt. You pressed that wisdom upon me.

I pressed no such wisdom. I wrote that a sentence needs a finite verb. Are you maintaining that an infinitive is not a verb? Infinitives can also denote present or past time and be active or passive.

Twenty-eight years, you say? Nesfield is spinning in his grave.

4:31 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

Lee: >The complement of "reason" is not "specimen"; the complement of "reason" is the noun clause "[that] the specimen below shows that birds of a feather flock together."<

You’re saying that “the reason” is “that the specimen below shows something”? The SP Times editors wouldn’t have seen anything below. Nice try.

4:40 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>What in others is a grave character flaw in me is a charming foible.<

And people tell you this, right? Maybe you really did spend twenty-eight years teaching (or what you call teaching), browbeating your students with lessons consisting of "I say it; so it's right."

Keep deluding yourself if you must. You're as charming as a rattlesnake.

4:49 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

>Lee: Since we are being picky, "Perhaps not" is a fragment. Don't try that old "elliptical clause" flim flam on me to weasel out of this grammar felony.<

I wouldn’t dream of trying the old "elliptical clause" flim flam to weasel out of it. This excerpt from Strunk & White’s Rule 6 should do the trick.

"It is permissible to make an emphatic word or expression serve the purpose of a sentence and to punctuate it accordingly:

Again and again he called out. No reply."


Lee, go and read your little book. Properly.

7:59 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

free webpage hit counter