Replay Thursday

Thursday ReplayIt’s time for a review of recent blog posts just in case you’ve missed them. We call this Replay Thursday. Here are posts from Proof That proofreading blog and 60 Is The New 60 blog during the past couple of weeks.

Grammar Giggle – Worn

Grammar Giggle – Close Profanity

Confusing Words of the Week

Step Away From The Buffet Line!

Happy Thanksgiving!

Grammar Giggle – Forty’s and 70s

Grammar Giggle – Phoenix or Pheonix?

Confusing Words of the Week

Replay Thursday

Thursday ReplayIt’s time for a review of recent blog posts just in case you’ve missed them. We call this Replay Thursday. Here are posts from Proof That proofreading blog during the past week.

Grammar Giggle – Discriminiation

Grammar Giggle – Sex Clams

Confusing Words of the Week

Random Thoughts

Random Thoughts

RandomThoughtsHere are a few things that I’ve come across lately and thought you might find interesting:

  1. Publically or Publicly? I changed the spelling of “publically” in a document recently and was told that it was a correct alternative spelling and to leave it that way. So I’ve researched it a little bit. It appears “publically” is gaining in popularity, but the majority still favors “publicly” as the correct spelling.
  2. Preventive or Preventative? According to Dictionary.com, the definitions are:

Preventive:

A. Medicine/Medical. Of or noting a drug, vaccine, etc., for preventing disease; prophylactic.

B. serving to prevent or hinder: preventive measures.

Preventative (actually refers you back to Preventive):

A. Medicine/Medical. of or noting a drug, vaccine, etc., for preventing disease; prophylactic.

B. serving to prevent or hinder: preventive measures.

Yep, they are the same. “Preventive” has been used in writings much longer, but “preventative” is gaining ground. “Preventative” is used more frequently outside the United States, while “preventive” is used more here in the U.S., so either is correct.

  1. Various different. I saw this recently in something I was proofreading. Unfortunately, both words mean the same thing. Again, according to Dictionary.com, “various” means: “of different kinds, as two or more things; differing one from another” while one of the definitions of “different” is: “various; several.” So in this case, pick one. Use either “various” or “different,” but not both of them together.
  1. Coming down the pipe or pike? This question was raised to me recently. It looks like “coming down the pike” is the original idiom from back when the “pike” was shortened from “turnpike.” However, “coming down the pipe” is gaining in popularity, because lots of things come down a pipe. Since “turnpikes” have fallen out of common language in favor of “freeway,” more people understand “pipe.” So the more common version in today’s lingo is “coming down the pipe.”
  1. Postliminary. I had this word come up in something I was proofreading recently. Since I hadn’t heard that word before, I looked it up. Merriam-Webster defines it as: done or carried on after something else or as a conclusion; subsequent —opposed to preliminary. While I’m not sure it is a great replacement for “after,” I kind of like it. So you will have preliminary, main, and postliminary.
  1. Thank-you. I’ve seen this word hyphenated before and just thought, without a doubt, that it was wrong. Someone told me recently it is correct. Apparently, it IS correct. Merriam-Webster online defines “thank-you” as “a polite expression of one’s gratitude.” Grammar Girl even says “thank-you” can be used as a noun or an adjective. However, when I search for “thank-you” on Google, the vast majority of the returns are not hyphenated. I believe I’ll stick with the unhyphenated version.
  1. Myriad of. “Myriad” is defined by Dictionary.com as “a very great or indefinitely great number of persons or things.” People say that since “myriad” originally meant 10,000 and you wouldn’t say “a 10,000 of trees,” that saying “a myriad of” is incorrect. However, common practice is to use “myriad” as both a noun and as a adjective, so it is becoming more commonplace to say “a myriad of.” Personally, I prefer “myriad” all by its little lonely self, and have corrected it myriad times (see what I did there?). But if the author insists, “a myriad of” is not incorrect.

Well that’s my list of petty annoyances that I’ve been keeping lately. Do you have any petty annoyances you’d like to share? Email those to me at proofthatblog@gmail.com.

Confusing Words of the Week

It’s time for “Confusing Words of the Week” where I take a set of two or three words that get confused and give you definitions and try to give you a memory trick to help you remember when to use which word. If you have words that confuse you, use the Ask PTB tab on the website or send an email to proofthatblog@gmail.com and they may appear here soon!

This week’s words are:

Elicit – to draw forth

  • He was trying to elicit a confession from his son.

Illicit – Unlawful

  • Stealing a car is an illicit act.

Tips to help remember:

Illicit – Illegal

Elicit – think of the legs of the “e” as trying to pull something out of the “back” of the “e”

Confusing Words of the Week

Words of the WeekIt’s time for “Confusing Words of the Week” where I take a set of two or three words that get confused and give you definitions and try to give you a memory trick to help you remember when to use which word. If you have words that confuse you, use the Ask PTB tab on the website or send an email to proofthatblog@gmail.com and they may appear here soon!

A friend asked about some confusion over two words. Here they are as this week’s words:

  • inquire – ask for information from someone; investigate; look into.
  • enquire – ask for information from someone; investigate; look into.

Yes, they are the same. Traditionally, “enquire” meant to ask, while “inquire” was used for more formal investigation. In the UK, either word is appropriate, but “inquire” is most common. Here in the US, “inquire” is the preferred word.

So you would be correct to use “inquire” in the US when you are asking for information or investigating something, although “enquire” is not incorrect. And the same would be true in the UK.

Emphasis Added

Emphasis AddedI had a question during a presentation I was making about whether the phrase “emphasis added” when used with a quotation was treated in the same font as the emphasized language, for example, if the emphasized language is bolded, is the phrase “emphasis added” bolded?

According to the Bluebook Section 5.2(d)(i),

Use a parenthetical clause after the citation to indicate when the source quoted contains an addition of emphasis . . . .

Their example has the emphasized language italicized and the “emphasis added” in parentheses, but not italicized or bolded.

Other information I found shows the following:

She said she would consider “a very short extension of the deadline, but only under the most extraordinary circumstances [emphasis added].”

  • You can also note the emphasis outside the quotation using parenthesis and as a separate sentence:

She said she would consider “a very short extension of the deadline, but only under the most extraordinary circumstances.” (Emphasis added.)

  • Or you can put the parenthetical at the end of the sentence which contains the quotation:

She said she would consider “a very short extension of the deadline, but only under the most extraordinary circumstances” (emphasis added).

  • Most other sources indicate that the words “emphasis added” should be at the end of the sentence, either in parentheses and lowercase letters before the quoted sentence’s ending punctuation or in parenthesis with upper case “e” in “emphasis” after the quotation’s ending punctuation with a period within the parenthesis. See the examples above.

The one common thread through all the sources was to be careful not to overuse emphasis in your writing.

I did not find anywhere that the words “emphasis added” should ever be italicized or bolded to match the quoted language being emphasized. My suggestion is that since the Bluebook specifically says to use a parenthetical clause after the quotation and their example shows it added before the quotation’s ending punctuation as in the third example above, that would be the safest way to use it.

Confusing Words of the Week

It’s time for “Confusing WoWords of the Weekrds of the Week” where I take a set of two or three words that get confused and give you definitions and try to give you a memory trick to help you remember when to use which word. If you have words that confuse you, use the Ask PTB tab on the website or send an email to proofthatblog@gmail.com and they may appear here soon!

This week’s words are:

Respectably – in a manner worthy of respect

The young boy received an award for acting respectably.

Respectfully – in a courteous manner

While being introduced to the baseball player, the girl acted respectfully and received an autographed baseball in return.

Respectively – in the order indicated

Jane and Joe finished the race at 5:34 and 6:46, respectively.

MEMORY TIPS:

RespectAbly – mAnner worth of respect

RespectFULLy – FULL of respect.

RespectIvely – in the Indicated order

Confusing Words of the Week

It’s time for “Confusing Words of the Week” where I take a set of two or three words that get confused and give you definitions and try to give you a memory trick to help you remember when to use which word. If you have words that confuse you, use the Ask PTB tab on the website or send an email to proofthatblog@gmail.com and they may appear here soon!

This week’s words are:

rain – falling water.

The rain was pouring down.

rein – (n.) part of a bridle; (v.) to check; to stop.

It was time to rein in the committee members who had launched off onto a different topic.

reign – (n.) the term of a ruler’s power; a period during which power is exercised; (v.) to rule.

The reign of the chapter president is over.

Some hints to help remember are that to stop something–like a horse–is to rein them in (like the horse’s rein) while reign looks pretty royal to me with the silent “g.”

Confusing Words of the Week

It’s time for “Confusing Words of the Week” where I take a set of two or three words that get confused and give you definitions and try to give you a memory trick to help you remember when to use which word. If you have words that confuse you, use the Ask PTB tab on the website or send an email to proofthatblog@gmail.com and they may appear here soon!

This week’s words are:

Interstate – Between states

Intrastate – Within one state

Intestate – Dying without a will

TIPS:

Interstate is between states, so you are entering (inter) different states as you travel through, while intrAstate is in the same state so you’re not entering other states, you are staying “In” the sAme state. Intestate means that it is going INto probate because there is no will.

ASK PTB – Naming An Amicus Curiae Brief

A reader used the Ask PTB page and asked “I’ve heard that the proper title for an amicus curiae brief is: ‘Brief Amicus Curiae for the Better Business Bureau’ (rather than ‘Amicus Curiae Brief for the Better Business Bureau’). Is that correct?”

In researching the issue, I assumed the question was about filing an amicus curiae brief in the United States Supreme Court. The short answer is that there is no standard.

Rule 37 of the Rules of Supreme Court of United States (“Supreme Court Rules”) sets forth the requirements for an amicus curiae brief to the U.S Supreme Court but doesn’t mention special requirements for naming the brief.

Here are examples of some of the titles of amicus curiae briefs I found:

  • Brief for an Amicus Curiae in Support of the Plaintiff, Petitioner, or Appellant, or in Support of Neither Party, on the Merits or in an Original Action at the Exceptions Stage
  • Brief for an Amicus Curiae in Support of the Defendant, Respondent, or Appellee, on the Merits or in an Original Action at the Exceptions Stage

There was mention that the requirements for the cover page of a Supreme Court brief are covered in Rule 34.1 of the Supreme Court Rules and it does apply to amicus curiae briefs. Those rules set forth that the cover page must specify whom the brief supports (e.g., the Brief of the Better Business Bureau as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner).

The American Bar Association has a Template for USSC Amicus Brief – No Motion on its website at https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/preview/publiced_preview_briefs_pdfs_07_08_07_588_PetitionerAmCupacificlegal.authcheckdam.pdf. That template lists the title of the brief as “Brief Amicus Curiae of Pacific Legal Foundation in Support of Petitioners.”

On the National Association of Attorneys General website in an article entitled “U.S. Supreme Court Brief Writing Style Guide” (http://www.naag.org/publications/nagtri-journal/volume-1-number-2/u.s.-supreme-court-brief-writing-style-guide.php), the author indicates:

Multi-state amicus briefs are a bit trickier to name. Some begin, “Brief of [or for] the States of _____ as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner [Respondent].” Others begin, “Brief of Amici Curiae States of _____ in Support of Petitioner [Respondent].” (The difference, for those of you who haven’t had your coffee yet, is the placement of the words “Amici Curiae.”) Either way is fine. Also, some multi-state amicus briefs list on the cover page the names of all the states that join the brief; others list only the name of the lead state, followed by the number of additional states that join (e.g., “Brief of Amici Curiae State of Michigan and 19 Other States in Support of Respondents”). Again, either way is fine, though I’m partial to the former approach.

So it appears to me that there is no specific requirement for how an amicus curiae brief is titled EXCEPT that it must specify the name of the amicus curiae parties and whom the brief supports.

I also contacted Cockle Legal Briefs (cocklelegalbriefs.com) which helps firms with U.S. Supreme Court and federal circuit court briefs to inquire as to their requirements for naming an amicus brief. They responded quickly and said that they didn’t believe that there is a required way to title the cover of an amicus brief. They attached samples for me that listed the amicus parties as:

  • BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE SOUTHEASTERN LEGAL FOUNDATION IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER
  • MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF AND AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PRO-LIFE OBSTETRICIANS & GYNECOLOGISTS, CHRISTIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, CATHOLIC MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL CATHOLIC BIOETHICS CENTER, ALABAMA
    PHYSICIANS FOR LIFE, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PRO LIFE NURSES, AND NATIONAL
    ASSOCIATION OF CATHOLIC NURSES IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
  • BRIEF OF PLANESENSE, INC. AND FLIGHT OPTIONS, LLC AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER
  • MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE AND BRIEF OF THE NATIONAL
    CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

They said that basically, the amicus party for whom you are writing the brief needs to be mentioned and whether that party supports the petitioner or respondent.

The long answer to the question is that either of the examples the reader gave in their question is correct. Each state’s appellate rules should set out any specific requirements for amicus curiae briefs, so if you are looking for information on filing such a brief in a specific state or federal court, check those specific court rules for their requirements.

If you have a question for Proof That Blog, click the Ask PTB tab on proofthatblog.com and we’ll find an answer for you.