Support for Indie Authors discussion

"In 1954, an advertising campaign for Winston cigarettes brought the debate into the public eye. Winston said their cigarettes tasted good “like a cigarette should,” and language lovers were outraged because the ad should have said, their cigarettes tasted good “as a cigarette should.”

I remember this controversy, and that Winston loved it. I think it sparked an entire genre of ad designed to catch the eye of the Grammar Police. But should writers avoid using "like" as a conjunction (because it isn't), or should we all just accept that bad grammar sometimes becomes standard practice and that "like" may by now indeed be considered a conjunction? Two recent books I've read by major novelists (Dan Brown and Elmore Leonard) used it as a conjunction. Elmore Leonard went one step further with "different than" instead of "different from"—also bad grammar.

I'll never use these things in my writing except possibly in dialogue, but should we all just accept these usages and move on? To this point in my book reviews I've called it bad grammar, but am I just being picky? What are your thoughts?

Ken wrote: "Elmore Leonard went one step further with "different than" instead of "different from"—also bad grammar."

Mm...I don't really think that's technically incorrect grammar, but it is against what most grammarians prefer. "Different from" is the most popular form in both British and English language. However, "different than" is fairly common in American English, while "different to" is fairly common in British English.

I can't find anyone who actually says "different than" is wrong, or for what specific reason. I'd say it's more an idiomatic issue than a grammatical one.

Ken wrote: "Elmore Leonard went one step further with "different than" instead of "different from"—also bad grammar."

Oh, and should you really say "bad" grammar...or "poor" grammar?

];>

But to answer your real question...I'd say it depends on whether you want to write "properly" or not.

What I can tell you is that in all likelihood the majority of readers will never notice the problem. Like as a conjunction has been used so much that almost no one's going to care.

If it bugs you, though, I'd stick with "as."

[Now wondering how many times I've unknowingly used "like" improperly!]

English is my third language, so I'm sure I make mistakes here and there. However, whenever I see blatant things like "different than" I can't help but think "Oh, come on, make a bloody effort, even *I* know that's wrong, and I'm foreign!"

I admit that may be a tad arrogant, but if we start to abandon correct grammar we can just as well abadon orthography and start writing phonetically, each in their own accent and home-grown slang, until the written word no longer serves its purpose of communication.

Too harsh?

ALSO...Marketers have been giving us incorrect grammar for a long time:

Milk: Got Milk? — Do you have milk?

Subway: Subway, eat fresh — Subway, eat fresh food

Apple: Think Different — Think differently

Staples: We got that. — We have that.

Lockheed Martin: We never forget who we’re working for. — We never forget for whom we work.

Micah wrote: "Lockheed Martin: We never forget who we’re working for. — We never forget for whom we work. "

Aaaarrrrgh!

Kat wrote: "...Too harsh?"

No, but I think as a non-native speaker, you have to take into consideration the way you learned English.

Native speakers--though they usually take classes in grammar after they have learned to spek it--learn their language organically. Education on our native language comes later (and honestly, most of us forget what was taught as quickly as possible because thinking of a language in technical terms hurts our brains!).

So, native speakers pick up a lot of habits from daily use which do not necessarily conform to proper grammar. Authors can only overcome this by conscious perseverance (or strict editors!).

The non-native speaker's approach to a language is very different than a native speaker's. They almost certainly have learned the new language artificially: in classes via some logical methodology. Their concept of that language is rooted in the rules as taught. Consequently, I think it likely that they may more easily see issues that native speakers don't.

Have you ever considered offering your services as an editor? ;D

Micah wrote: "Oh, and should you really say "bad" grammar...or "poor" grammar?..."

If it ain't good grammar, it's gotta be bad.

Right or wrong, they can be considered, at the very least, controversial. If you like to use them, try not to use them in your blurb or over-use them in the first three chapters, which are viewable on the "Look Inside" feature. You may drive off some potential buyers. And I can imagine something being different from something else, but I can't visualize it being different than, or different to the other. Just sayin'...

If you are writing 'Kevin in the Lair of the 50ft Valley Girls' then you can use 'like' as a conjunction as much as you wish!

Honestly, I will only ever throw out the fact that 'like' is not a comparison word if I see it used as such by a social media grammar warrior.

Otherwise my stance is this: Language changes. It is different than it used to be. Ain't no need to worry about what other folks be saying. As long as you are making yourself clearly understood, who cares? Slang is slang. When I was in high school, my friends and I called things that were cool 'dill.' I'm sure it drove our parents nuts. I'm sure my kids will say things that I think dumb as well.

Just as long as we aren't trying to make Fetch happen.

Common usage doesn't necessarily conform to proper grammatical rules. I speak very differently from how I wrote my university papers. We are impacted by where we live, our cultural background, who we spend time with, etc.

When it comes to grammatical accuracy in novels, I look at POV. If we are in the head of an Oxford-educated chemist, I'm expecting to see very proper and precise grammar. If we are in the head of a Newfoundland fisherman.

Christina wrote: "Just as long as we aren't trying to make Fetch happen."

Christina, stop trying to make Fetch happen!

But doesn't a language have to have rules lest it become unintelligible except locally? We already have local idioms. We have different versions of the original Latin we now call English, German, Spanish, and French. Language can change if everyone goes along with the change, but we already have historical evidence that certain regional dialects resulting from local change often becomes disparaged as ignorant or backwards. And so if you write something I see as grammatically incorrect, I may think you're ignorant, while you may see me as inflexible. I say this only to bring it into the discussion. Meanwhile, excuse me while I fetch my dictionary to puzzle out what Christina said.

*rolls up sleeves as she prepares to dive in*

Okay, I have never, nor will I ever, know all the grammar rules of the English language. And I'm an English Education major. Gasp, point, and stare all you want, but here is my defense: Each and every rule of the English language is allowed to be broken "if you have a specific purpose for doing so." Those were the words of my horribly strict Grammar Professor in college. That was the day I stopped caring about proper grammar.

That being said, I'm not about to use txt msg spelling in my books, LOL and OMG, but I'm okay with a few reviewers being upset over my "improper" use when the majority of my readers don't even notice.

When I was teaching, I was just happy if a student actually spelled out "he laughed" in a story instead of "he lol'd." Times are a-changing. We can fight it all we want to and just because it's changing it doesn't make it right, but it's not our decision to make. It's every younger generation's decision to make.

So I say TO EACH HIS OWN!! :)

Ken wrote: "But doesn't a language have to have rules lest it become unintelligible except locally? We already have local idioms. We have different versions of the original Latin we now call English, German,..."

This is precisely why most writers don't reproduce local accents and dialects phonetically. It becomes unintelligible. It's more important to try catch the basic 'rhythm' of the speech.

We all write in POV, whether it's first or third person. So we are in our character's heads. Some of them will think in more precise grammatical structure than others will, and we have to consider that when we are writing.

As a writer I don't see myself as a guardian of proper grammar. I'm here to entertain. And keeping an authentic voice to my characters is far more important to me than making sure that I always introduce an adverb clause with a subordinating conjunction.

Here here ann! And I break almost every single one of them in every story I tell. The point is to have a purpose when you do it, English is a living in language that will constantly be growing. there's nothing you can do to slow it down, since essentially it can take and add any language to itself. Spanglish was not a lie.

Ken wrote: "But doesn't a language have to have rules lest it become unintelligible except locally? We already have local idioms. We have different versions of the original Latin we now call English, German,..."

Sorry, but English was divided into several vastly different languages before any of us were but a whisper of a suggestion of a hope in our great great grandpappy's eye. For a great majority of us, language is already unintelligble in other areas.

Take the Newfoundland fisherman Jenycka mentioned. I've met a few folks from Newfoundland and half my conversation was saying, "Repeat that?" Or "I have no idea what you just said." Same thing with a few East Texans and Louisiana natives I've met. Heck, I once went to a trade show in SC and was asked to get out of the drive through line and come into the McDonald's because the girl at the window couldn't understand my accent. So which of us is speaking properly?

Ann wrote: "*rolls up sleeves as she prepares to dive in*

Okay, I have never, nor will I ever, know all the grammar rules of the English language. And I'm an English Education major. Gasp, point, and stare al..."

\/\/3 /\/\u57 57r|\/3 70 r3/\/\4|n teh c|_|rr3n4 |n 411 \/\/3 d0 \/\/r|7|ng \/\/|5e. kekeke! ^-^

Dammit! Proof I'm old. It took me far too long to parse that.

You can read that? I have no idea what that says!!!

Christina wrote: "Dammit! Proof I'm old. It took me far too long to parse that."

I suppose it doesn't really keep with the 'keeping things current' idea. :)

Ann wrote: "You can read that? I have no idea what that says!!!"

We must strive to remain the current in all we do writing wise. hehehe! kitty face.

Holy crap. I never would have figured that out!!

Just don't think of each character as a letter, but a part of a letter, and soon it comes clear. Switch numbers for the alphabet, and soon it looks intelligible. Now I want to write a fantasy book and make my elven language look like that.

Current gave me problems, but I'm blaming you 4 your typo.

Christina wrote: "Current gave me problems, but I'm blaming you 4 your typo."

Yeah, sorry bout the typo, but leet is hard!

Riley wrote: "Now I want to write a fantasy book and make my elven language look like that. "

Hackzor Elves! That would be teh amazezors!

I have a character that talks in leet. It was not pretty. ^-^ I lasted an entire chapter until I stopped, slapped myself, and lessened the l33t.

Just 4 f3w l3tt3rs 4r3 |nt3r3st|ng!
F|_|11 1337 |5 |\||g|-|7/\/\4r|5|-|!

I don't think it's a nightmare...then again, I spent to many years playing WoW...and I'd only use it like JRR used the writing on the ring. I know he came up with a whole language, but why do that when there's already one there!

I really like that idea Riley. The one hackzored ring, or magic spells in leet!

There was a book I came across in which every single word was misspelled on purpose, because the story was the first-person account of a character who barely knew how to write, but it was all misspelled in a way that the book was still easy to read.

Micah nailed it when he said that native speakers pick up grammatically incorrect habits. That Is exactly why authors choose to write in vernacular rather than strictly correct grammar. No one would want to read fiction that was absolutely correct. Fiction reflects popular usage. It would sound too contrived otherwise.

Michael wrote: "Micah nailed it when he said that native speakers pick up grammatically incorrect habits. That Is exactly why authors choose to write in vernacular rather than strictly correct grammar...."

Yes, he did -- and so have others here. The thing to keep in mind is that "strictly correct grammar" is a myth - there is no such thing. It is quite true that when a person learns a language as an adult, they are at first taught a subset, that includes the rules the teacher prefers -- and that choice is arbitrary. That doesn't make other choices "wrong". "We ain't got none of that" is perfect grammar -- it's just not constructed according to grammatical rules that a subset of people embrace. If they don't like it, and they may disparage it. But it's not "bad" -- that being a moral judgement.

The point isn't that language needs rules so people can communicate effectively. The real point is how those rules are applied. Grammar is a social construct that is often used to sort the "right sorts" from the "wrong sorts" and "my tribe" from "your tribe". In on-line reviews, comments about grammar (generally unsupported) are quite often just another tactical cheap shot. Even when they aren't, who is actually ignorant is open to question. Given the arbitrary nature of grammatical rules, no one can ever be sure they know "all" the rules. Writers can and do borrow abstruse and little known grammatical constructions and use them to achieve a desired effect.

Language is not some rigid fragile thing that needs ironclad protection. "Different from" and "different than" are both perfectly fine: from = than, in that case. Words don't have unitary meanings. Language is elastic, but it's not free play either.

I advocate using grammar that is "good enough". I also advocate readers being skeptical of their own grasp of "perfect" grammar. If a person thinks there is such a thing, and especially if they think they know what it is, that belief is going to lead them into error.

Ken wrote: " But should writers avoid using "like" as a conjunction (because it isn't), or should we all just accept that bad grammar sometimes becomes standard practice and that "like" may by now indeed be considered a conjunction?"

It's also worth pointing out that some words are more elastic than others. Debating whether "like" can be considered a conjunction is a far cry from the now accepted usage of "literally" to mean "figuratively". (Or whether the period goes inside or outside the quote, or if 'scare quotes' should be single or double.)

Michael wrote: "Micah nailed it when he said that native speakers pick up grammatically incorrect habits. That Is exactly why authors choose to write in vernacular rather than strictly correct grammar. No one would want to read fiction that was absolutely correct. Fiction reflects popular usage. It would sound too contrived otherwise. "

That's pretty much my take on it, too, Michael. Some proper grammar is not in common use anymore. Using it in the narration of a story might be jarring to the reader and one of the last things we want to do is tap them on the shoulder and say, "Hi. I'm the writer. You're reading my story." We should be as invisible as possible. (In most cases).

Jenycka wrote: "Christina wrote: "Just as long as we aren't trying to make Fetch happen."

Christina, stop trying to make Fetch happen!"

LOL as a caucasian from South Africa, I think I belong in this conversation!

Adding to the topic, if you're writing in 1st person, the game changes. My fifteen year old survivor in a Dystopian world is not going to go around screaming "Damned thee to the Devil!" Instead of saying a simple, "Go to h*ll."

Kay wrote: "Jenycka wrote: "Christina wrote: "Just as long as we aren't trying to make Fetch happen."

Christina, stop trying to make Fetch happen!"

LOL as a caucasian from South Africa, I think I belong in t..."

So if you're from Africa...

Okay, not going to finish that because anyone who hasn't seen the movie will have a terrible impression of me.

Christina wrote: "Kay wrote: "Jenycka wrote: "Christina wrote: "Just as long as we aren't trying to make Fetch happen."

Christina, stop trying to make Fetch happen!"

LOL as a caucasian from South Africa, I think I..."

Oh my God, Karen!