Steven Baxter

Patrolling the murkier waters of the mainstream media

Syndicate contentRSS

Why we should be a little less pedantic

Sometimes the message is much more important than the words.

We are, it seems, a nation of pedants. Pedantry - or to give it its proper name, pedantitude - can be a force for good. An apostrophe here or a comma, there, can sometimes make a massive difference to an otherwise good sentence, rendering it incomprehensible and impossible to understand. (Well, without re-reading, working out what's going on, saying "Oh, right" to yourself and moving on. But who wants to do that? We're busy people nowadays. We need to be spoonfed our information and for it to be perfect the moment it arrives in front of us, in the form of words.)
People got upset, didn't they, about the apostrophes disappearing from the Waterstones (or should that be Waterstone's?) shops. I don't worry so much, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I should declare an interest, in that the high street booksellers were the first company to give me a job when I was unemployed, and so are therefore clearly the best company in the world ever (and do check out their staff recommendations, as they're really very good).

But secondly, this is, for better or worse, the way things are going: if you put an apostrophe in a hashtag, for example, it doesn't work. People are browsing the web looking for stuff, and don't always get their punctuation perfectly precise; companies need to be as accessible as possible, without alienating customers who may (or might) not be as capable as those of us who went to good schools at getting things right. Our language, which has changed a lot down the centuries, is changing even now, and it's something to celebrate, rather than worry about.

Besides, I think there's a stench of snobbery about pedantry sometimes. People call misplaced apostrophes "greengrocer's apostrophe's", sneering at people who've got up at four in the morning and lugged around giant crates of fresh fruit and then, for some reason, haven't had the decency to get their punctuation right as well, like that's the most important thing of all. "Oh I'm sorry," says the greengrocer, back from Covent Garden in the freezing December morning air, "I really ought to pay more attention to where I'm putting my commas and that. Thank you very much, Mr Booksmart, for looking down on me! Now bugger off out of my shop, you don't have a job and can't afford my canteloupes." Look, we've all done it. We've all tutted at signs, and the Facebook updates of people we used to know who turned out to be quite thick. We've all been there, and it's a cheap laugh, but, I don't know who ends up looking like the bigger idiot.

All writer's, me included, like to be corrected when they get something hideously and awfully wrong. (We might cry and stamp our feet at the time, but we appreciate it really.) Or even slightly wrong. We don't like getting things wrong at all. We try our best, god love us, but we're not necessarily people with perfect grammar and English or who can spend five minutes looking up facts on Google to make sure they're completely accurate; writing is sometimes (or perhaps often) more about having ideas in the first place rather than having the exact right correct perfect words to make them into the best sentences.

If you can have both skills, well, then the world is yours for the taking of course, but I leave that kind of writing class to your AA Gills, your Johnny Clarksons, your whatshisface, you know, the one who writes about what he had for dinner, who's got a sister who plays chess or snap or Yahtzee or something, yes him.

Most decent publications have subeditors, dusty old pedants who act as a kind of vital safety net to save writers from themselves. It's a job I used to do - yes, I was that corduroy-clad soldier. But as they dwindle in number and gradually go to that great unhyphenated adjectival in the sky, more and more copy ends up appearing in its raw, unedited, ragged state.

It's a shame, but again, that's the way these things are going.

All that said, I think there's a level of pedantitudinousness that extends way beyond the kind of helpful corrections that all author's appreciate, that becomes a kind of snippy one-upmanship. "Oh, you've used the word 'may' when you should have used 'might'," say people, quickly, on Twitter, making fun of someone's usage of the English language, as if it may (or should that be might?) make a difference to the meaning of what you've said. Yes yes yes, you wont to say, all right, I get you're point, but look - the thing is the thing, isn't it?

Look at what it's actually trying to say, rather than lobbing rotten fruit at the greengrocers' apostrophes. Sometimes the message is much more important than the word's.

15 comments

May's picture

A pedant is a person who is overly concerned with formalism. The term formalism describes an emphasis on form over content or meaning in the arts, literature, or philosophy. A practitioner of formalism is called a formalist.

frances smith's picture

i was once in a pet shop and saw a rabbit for sale from neverland, but i liked it, it made it seem a bit mysterious.

Ronald's picture

Here is comedian Stuart Lee bemoaning a greengrocers' sign:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwx8QOgYfsE

It may be a cheap laugh, but it's still a laugh.

cs's picture

I helped my uncle jack off a horse

emem's picture

I'm assuming you had some subtle or ironic reason for the misuse of the apostrophe in your article. Is it an invitation to play 'Spot the Pedant'?
(eg writer's/writers and author's/authors)

Matt Smith's picture

Great article, just one point. Penultimate para, penultimate line - should be 'want'

Tesco Shelf Stacker's picture

I'm a terrible speller - my grammar is lousy too. I tend to write how I speak - which I'm aware of and try to avoid doing sometimes ... but then I think, fuck it - this is me its who I am - Einstein, Churchill, Kennedy - they were all lousy spellers and used poor grammer so sod it ...I'll have my say anyway ... even if it upsets the grammar nazis out there. lol ;-)

Tesco Shelf Stacker's picture

"I, myself, was always recognized . . . as the "slow one" in the family. It was quite true, and I knew it and accepted it. Writing and spelling were always terribly difficult for me. My letters were without originality. I was . . . an extraordinarily bad speller and have remained so until this day."

Agatha Christie

Benito Aramando's picture

Spot on comment, Sam.

sam's picture

Hmm, well, you have a point. But sometimes laziness leaves language poorer, doesn't it?

I quite often hear "reticent" used where people mean "reluctant." I assume they do this because they think the former is a more interesting version of the latter. But it isn't. And the more people use it - and they're usually fairly intelligent people or they wouldn't be using either - the more that the correct usage falls out of habit. And then one day we wake up and reticent actually *means* reluctant, because language is a living thing and that's how it works. Only then we have no word for 'reticent', which is quite a useful concept and has nuance above and beyond "shy".

Same with "specious" and "spurious" or "disinterested" and "uninterested".

But then I'm not just a pedant, I'm a language snob too. When someone phones and says "I was hoping to talk to yourself" I want to DO VIOLENCE.

Mr Larrington's picture

"All writer's, me included, like to be corrected when they get something hideously and awfully wrong."

Please tell me this was intended to be ironic.

Marxist Nutter's picture

"All writer's"

Werll tutt tutt tutt!! - Nah you are spot on. I would add there is really no such things as 'correct' grammer, spelling punctuation. Language evolves and changes. It has been yonks since I heard anybody use the subjunctive clause 'If I WERE" in normal conversation, for example. Hell - standardised English spelling is a very recent phenomenon. Language changes - these pedants only show their own ignorance of language!

jODNEY's picture

Amen to this article! Thanks!

Mr. Divine's picture

Don't be so vague Steven. That should read ' Why some of us should be a little less pedantic'. Remember not everyone is pedantic.

rb's picture

Problem is, we have reached the point where the words often fail to convey the message.

Worse, this laxity is spreading from general writing into fields where the details really are important: you might care whether the nurse injects you with 10.0mg or 100mg.

I view all this as a consequence of the rise of regulation over competence, but don't get me started on that theme.

Latest tweets