Doing
things by the numbers
JUNE CASAGRANDE
(Published:
In the TV series
"24," which is sometimes written on screen as "Twentyfour," counter- terrorism agent Jack Bauer has
saved the world from nuclear destruction, thwarted poison gas attacks on
civilians, escaped the clutch of terrorist abductors, exposed a traitor in the
White House, used a cell phone nonstop for 24 hours without the battery dying
and himself actually risen from the dead.
And, through the miracle
called "suspension of disbelief," I and millions of other Americans
can simply accept all this.
But when Jack jumps into
his SUV at 9 a.m. at Ontario Airport then comes screeching up five minutes
later in the heart of the San Fernando Valley -- well, that's when they've gone
too far.
It's exactly this kind of
absurdity that has been turning people off of scripted television and into the
clutches of reality TV. This is why I believe there's a huge demand for a new
reality show I've come up with, called "The Real 24," in which entire
episodes contain nothing but Jack Bauer sitting in his car for 60 minutes at a
pop.
Oh, and there would be
one more major difference between my show and the original: When my show cuts
to commercial, the graphic would correctly spell out, "Twenty-four."
The guidelines for
writing numbers -- especially for knowing when to spell them out -- are
ridiculously complicated.
Newspapers follow
different guidelines from books, so the more you read the less you know. And
even if you stick to just one style guide, says the newspaper style bible the
Associated Press Stylebook, trouble will find you faster than Jack can find a
wide-open lane on the 110 at rush hour.
AP's basic rule is that
numbers less than 10 are spelled out, while 10 and up are written as figures.
"I guffaw in disbelief an average of eight to 12 times during each
one-hour episode."
But AP has literally
dozens of different entries with confusing and seemingly arbitrary rules. For
example, ages always require figures. "Jack looks about 38 years old, his
daughter looks 24 years old and this might seem perfectly plausible to an
8-year-old."
You have to look under
"fractions" to see that you're supposed to spell out and hyphenate
fractions less than one: "Four-fifths of Jack's time is spent in the
car." But when writing about a number greater than one, fractions use
figures: "Jack's SUV consumes 1 7/8 tanks of gas every day -- most of it
while idling."
Under
"dimensions," AP tells us that height, width, depth, etc. use figures
as well. Jack's only 5-foot-5 but his gun is a full 8 inches long. But you have
to turn to the "weights" to see that this is true of weights as well.
"That's 5 pounds of baloney."
But none of the dozens of
listings referenced in AP's numbers section will tell you how to spell and
punctuate numbers.
The know where to turn
for this answer, you must already know where to turn -- or at least read a
column by someone who knows where to turn:
In the punctuation
section of the AP Stylebook, under "hyphens," we find our answer:
"When large numbers must be spelled out, use a hyphen to connect a word
ending in -y to another word: 'twenty-one,' 'fifty-five,' etc."
And that, above all else,
is why the show "Twentyfour" is nowhere
near as successful as my properly spelled show will be.
* * * *
Getting
some help from Mr. Burns
JUNE CASAGRANDE
(Published:
If being able to cite all
five First Amendment rights is the epitome of informed citizenship, then what's
the antithesis of this enlightened state? "The Simpsons."
Or at least that's the implication of a much-trumpeted recent survey -- one
I've read about in the Los Angeles Times and
For those who've missed
it, an organization called the McCormick Tribune Freedom Museum conducted a
phone survey of 1,000 people and concluded that Americans are more likely to
know Bart and Homer than they are to know that they're free to worship Bart and
Homer, to talk about Bart and Homer and to assemble peaceably in honor of Bart
and Homer (which may explain the low turnout at the weekly prayer group I
host).
Now, I'm as
anti-entertainment as the next intellectual poser. If you ream "American
Idol," mock Dr. Phil, roll your eyes at the national obsession with
"Desperate Housewives," I'm with you. But hands off "The Simpsons."
Because while a half hour
with this cartoon family may not get you any closer to an 'A' on your high
school civics exam, it certainly will leave you better informed about the
English language.
Case in point: For my
entire life, I thought you were supposed to kick off a footrace with a call of,
"To your marks. Get set. Go!" It took one C. Montgomery Burns,
billionaire atom miser and boss of one Homer Simpson, to set me straight in a
rerun I saw just the other night.
"Toe your
marks!" Burns yells to employees about to race.
Toe? Yes, toe.
According to "Garner's Modern American Usage," an actual book I keep
on a shelf near my actual bound copy of the United States Constitution,
"toe your marks" comes from "track-and-field events in which the
contestants were once told to put one foot on the starting line."
If you didn't already
know it, this is why "toe the line" is spelled the same way. Though I
once thought it meant to help others "tow" a line of rope to haul
some heavy object, it actually means, "Hey, get up here at the starting
line with the rest of us and stop slacking in the back ranks."
I should note that the
"Simpsons" episode from which I nabbed this
crucial bit of academic wisdom is one I've seen in rerun form over and over and
over again without ever hearing the nuance of Burns' pronunciation until this
very last time.
This fact proves beyond a
reasonable doubt that I'm not just free to watch three "Simpsons" reruns a night but that I'm intellectually
justified in doing so.
And if that doesn't
convince you, consider this: Not 24 hours later, on the very evening of writing
this column, a "Simpsons" rerun enlightened
the free world with the following words of wisdom.
Chief Wiggum:
"Hijinks. That's a funny word. Three dotted
letters in a row."
Lou the cop: "Is it
hyphenated?"
Chief Wiggum:
"It used to be. Of course, every generation hyphenates the way it wants
to."
This is education we can
all use.
Consider that just two
years ago the Associated Press Stylebook insisted that "free-lance"
should be hyphenated. But they changed their tune. It's
"freelance," they now insist.
And though there was once
a battle over whether people should write "e-mail" or
"email," the verdict is in. The one with the hyphen won. I bet Wiggum knew that.
So when it comes to
learning language, there's no better way to spend 90 minutes a day five days a
week than watching "Simpsons" episodes.
But if you're bent on
learning about our national heritage, founding fathers, principles of democracy
and all that stuff -- well, perhaps you really should open a textbook. I'll
even recommend one that I myself have read cover to cover. It was written by
Jon Stewart.
*
JUNE CASAGRANDE is a freelance writer. She can be reached at JuneTCN@aol.com.
* * * *
Bipartisan Blunders
A Word, Please
By June Casagrande
President Bush knows the secret to always nailing perfect grammar.
It's a lesson we should all heed: Never, ever say anything that isn't written down
on paper by skilled professionals dedicated to making you sound good.
The president's several forays off script have only served to
reinforce the wisdom of this strategy. He may have "misunderestimated"
his speech writers when he used his own words to ask, "Is our children
learning?" But these are calculated losses -- the sacrifice of a few pawns
designed to advance the cause of proving the genius of his normal strategy. Who
can deny how brilliant he sounds in comparison when he goes back on script?
Leadership, that's what it is. And I, for one, take comfort in it.
But then, last week, tragedy -- an earth-shattering event that has
rattled my worldview. See if you can spot the gaffe in the following prepared
statement made by the president.
"Khalid Sheik Muhammad sought out young men from
Yes, it has something to do with "whom."
Now, I know what some of you are thinking: "Liberal media! So
the Bush administration is to public speaking what the Gerald Ford
administration was to public walking. How about picking on one of your buddies
for a change, say a reporter at NPR?" To which I say, okey
dokey. Here's a quote from NPR reporter Corey Flintoff about the elections in
"Whom" can be slippery. Not only does it elude
presidential speech writers, but language book author William F. Buckley Jr.
has been busted using it wrong as well. (Sorry, but I just don't have any
similar dirt on Noam Chomsky or Al Franken - yet.) So I'll start with the single most
crucial thing you need to know about "whom" and "whomever":
They're optional.
Leading language authorities agree that "whom" is for
formal speech and writing. Because "formal" is subjective, you get to
decide when it applies.
Again, I know what you're thinking: "Yes, June, that's all
well and good for normal folk, but I am someone destined for the highest peaks
of greatness. I plan to one day rise to the position of NPR reporter or maybe
even presidential speech writer. Therefore, I must master 'whom.'"
Fine. Here's the basic rule: "Who" is a subject, just as
"I," "he," "she," "we" and
"they" are subjects. "Whom" is an object, just as
"me," "him," "her," "us" and "them"
are objects. Therefore, whenever you want to know whether to use whom or who,
just try plugging in any of these pairs. "He is coming to the party,"
or, "Him is coming to the party"? The subject form is right, so use "who"
here.
Master this and you're instantly on par with anyone who's ever
occupied public radio airwaves or the presidential pajamas.
Those truly destined for greatness are no doubt thinking,
"Thanks for the primer, but I refuse to sit idly by while you weasel out
of telling us why Bush and Flintoff were wrong."
It's about time someone had the courage to demand accountability
in journalism. I submit to your power.
In the Bush quote and the Flintoff
quote, the pronouns in question are acting as both objects and subjects. In Flintoff's
case, the pronoun is the object of "to work with," as in, "We'll
work with him." But it's also the subject of the verb "wins,"
"He wins this election." Same thing for the Bush quote. The pronoun
is the object of "thought," but the subject of "would arouse
suspicion." And, for you who've stayed with me until now, here's the
simple and universal rule for handling these cases: Whenever it's both an
object and a subject, it takes the subject form - i.e. "who" or
"whoever." That's all you need to know to tower above NPR reporters,
the president or even the president's speech writers.
Use this power wisely.
* * * * * * *
A Word, Please
If or Whether
By June Casagrande
If you want to know whether your language skills are up to snuff,
ask yourself: Are the words "whether" and "if" both used
correctly in the first part of this sentence? Are they interchangeable? And
what exactly is the difference between the two?
If you answered, "I dunno,"
"Duh," or, "I must've missed that lecture," I have good
news. This alone does not mean that your language skills are sub par. On the
contrary, a lot of language experts don't know the answer to this one. It's
even conceivable that certain language columnists might have to look it up
before venturing to write a column about it. (Hypothetically speaking.) If, on
the other hand, you answered, "pickled ginger," "the
hypotenuse" or "A-Rod," then I'm afraid it is possible that your
communication-related insecurities are well-founded.
For the rest of us, here's some insight from the most helpful
reference book I could find.
"It's good editorial practice," writes Bryan Garner of
"Garner's Modern American Usage," "to
distinguish between these words." Then he goes on to do just that.
"'Let me know if you'll be coming' means that I want to hear
from you only if you're coming. But 'Let me know whether you'll be coming'
means that I want to hear from you about your plans one way or the other."
In other, less clear words, "if" is for
"conditional ideas" whereas "whether" is for alternatives
and possibilities.
That's a good distinction - as good a place as any to draw the
line between these two words - but only if you first accept Garner's
thesis that it's good editorial practice to distinguish between the two. That's
the part I find highly questionable. The minute you declare yourself in a
position to narrow down the use of two words, you're contradicting other authorities.
And you're also labeling as "wrong" uses that are both customary and
very defensible.
The dictionary definitions of these two words make it clear that
there is no such line in the sand.
Webster's New World College Dictionary does mention that "whether"
has to do with alternatives, such as, "whether he drives or (whether he)
flies, he'll be on time." Webster's adds, "Sometimes, the second is
merely implied or understood, 'We don't know whether
he'll improve (or not).'" But
that's Webster's second definition of "whether," not the first.
Webster's first definition of "whether" sounds a lot like Garner's definition of "if.": "if it be the
case or fact that."
What's worse, Webster's gives three definitions for the
conjunction "if." And definition No. 3 is "whether."
So clearly, Garner's drawing a line in
the sand between these two will only muddy the waters and give grammar bullies
ammo to label perfectly defensible uses as "wrong."
Of course, any native speaker knows that "whether" and
"if" aren't completely interchangeable. "If you build it, they
will come" doesn't really mean the same thing if you replace the
"if" with a whether. Or consider answering, "Do you want Thai
food?" with, "Sure. If you do." Changing that "if" to
"whether" wouldn't make any sense at all.
But you didn't need a language scholar to tell you that anymore
than you need them to tell you that adding "or not" to
"whether" is often redundant.
"Generally use 'whether' alone -- not with the words 'or not'
tacked on," the "Chicago Manual of Style" says. "The 'or
not' is necessary only when you mean to convey the idea of 'regardless of
whether.' 'We'll finish on time whether or not it rains.'" Garner, who
helped write the Chicago Manual, says pretty much the exact same thing.
Whether or not experts continue to try to confuse us, you can
trust your instincts on these two words if and only if you have a basic grasp
of the difference between conjunctions and pickled ginger.