Writing

Prescriptivism or consistentism?

This entry was posted in Commentary Writer ethics Writing and tagged grammar language writing on by

Recently I replied to an online point that said that if the US enacts laws that enforce Christian views, the country will be a theocracy. I pointed out that all or nearly all European countries for most of history have met that criterion and that the USA itself was a “theocracy” by that measure until at least the 1960s. The person making the post rebuked me for being a “prescriptivist” and implied it’s consistent with being a libertarian.

First, it’s not a political issue. I don’t advocate laws requiring people to use words with standard meanings, except in legal documents. Aside from that, I’m not exactly a prescriptivist. I prefer to consider myself a “consistentist.” Whatever meaning you give to a word, stick with it and don’t conflate it with other definitions. If you want to use “glory” to mean “a nice knock-down argument,” don’t use it to mean “splendor” at the same time.
(more…)

Plagiarism accusations against Harvard’s president

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged education Harvard plagiarism on by

Taking a principled approach means that sometimes you support a person in one respect while being severely critical in another. I supported Harvard president Claudine Gay when she said that calls for genocide don’t categorically qualify as harassment. But now there’s evidence that she’s a repeat plagiarist, and that demands strong criticism if she is.

Update: Claudine Gay has resigned as president of Harvard University. See also the new paragraph at the end of this post.

Plagiarism consists of using someone else’s words or ideas and passing them off as original work. If you cite the source, it isn’t plagiarism (though it might be a copyright violation if you use too much). Sometimes it’s tricky to identify. Two people can have the same idea independently. Words can stick in your mind, leading you to use them without being aware that you’re lifting them from another author. Sometimes there’s just one good way to say something.
(more…)

What can you do with Steamboat Willie?

This entry was posted in Writing Writing as business and tagged copyright law writing on by

What can you do with Steamboat Willie, early in the next year?

I won’t try to write a filk about it just now; answering the question is complicated enough in prose. You may have heard that “Mickey Mouse is going into the public domain,” but that’s true only in a limited sense. The first two released Mickey Mouse cartoons, Steamboat Willie and Plane Crazy, will enter the public domain on January 1, 2024, after 95 years. If you’re thinking of creating your own cartoons, drawings, fan fiction, or professional fiction based on them, you can do that legally, but you need to be careful. Mickey Mouse changed significantly over the years, and later versions of him, along with the vast majority of his cartoons, are still under copyright protection. In addition, Mickey Mouse™ remains a Disney trademark. If your work steps over certain bounds, you could hear from Disney’s lawyers.

Duke University’s website has a detailed article on what you can and can’t do. It’s not a substitute for a lawyer’s advice, but it’s a good place to start, and it could be enough if you aren’t creating stuff for profit.
(more…)

They’ve got little lists, and little research

This entry was posted in Writing and tagged research writing on by

You’ve seen those articles, maybe while trying to look something up. Lists of obscure and remarkable facts. “The strangest vehicles ever made.” “Ten ridiculous laws that are still on the books.” “Eight things you didn’t know about broccoli.” These “listicles,” as the little lists are often called, can be entertaining, but as a rule they’re unreliable information sources. Most are written by freelancers without in-depth knowledge. They repeat popular myths and lack citations. They’re the modern-day descendants of Ripley’s Believe It or Not.

This type of article is easy to skim, and readers who see one with a remarkable claim are apt to share it. This makes it good material for filling out blogs that exist to attract attention to a website. I’ve written some myself and made a strong commitment to getting the facts right. Other writers are more concerned with finishing the piece fast so they can collect their fee and move on to the next assignment. Unless a piece is by an author with relevant expertise or at least on a site that avoids fluff, you shouldn’t treat it as a reliable source.
(more…)

Coping with Chinese disinformation 1

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged China research writing on by

When researching and writing material about China, you have to be aware of the Chinese government’s disinformation efforts. People who speak out against it are apt to be the targets of systematic insults and character assassination. If you’re operating on a small level, you probably won’t be bothered. Even though my articles on boycotting the Chengdu Worldcon did well in the search engines, I’ve received only one clear threat with a Chinese connection.

CNN has reported on “the world’s largest known online disinformation operation”:

The Chinese government has built up the world’s largest known online disinformation operation and is using it to harass US residents, politicians, and businesses—at times threatening its targets with violence. …

The onslaught of attacks – often of a vile and deeply personal nature – is part of a well-organized, increasingly brazen Chinese government intimidation campaign targeting people in the United States, documents show.

(more…)

The long arm of Chinese censorship

This entry was posted in Writing on by

A company that uses a Hong Kong print shop exposes itself to Chinese censorship, no matter where the books will be distributed. Penguin Random House found that out when it had The Penguin New Zealand Anthology printed in Hong Kong. The printing company, not named in the article, told the publisher it couldn’t print the book because it had the words “first Republic of China” and “Taiwanese flag.” The publisher said it used the Hong Kong printer because of special format requirements that no one in Australia or New Zealand could meet.Flag of Taiwan

By Chinese law, Taiwan does not exist as an independent nation, and saying otherwise is forbidden.

The book was printed with the offending words redacted. Any company that cares about a free press should not use a printer that has to bow to China’s government.

The craft of children’s books

This entry was posted in Techniques Writing as business and tagged books publishing writing on by

I just learned that my friend Debbie Ohi, a writer and illustrator of children’s books, has a Substack. Even though I never plan to write a children’s book, I was fascinated by her article on understanding picture book format and construction. I’d never realized there were such strict page requirements. If you’re thinking of getting into this field or know someone who is, you should find her articles very interesting.

What is a “conspiracy theory”?

This entry was posted in Commentary Writing and tagged language usage vocabulary writing on by

A conspiracy theory, according to Merriam-Webster, is “a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators.” Alternatively, it’s “a theory asserting that a secret of great importance is being kept from the public”; the idea presumably is that insiders have conspired to keep the truth hidden.

Dictionary.com takes a similar approach: “a theory that rejects the standard explanation for an event and instead credits a covert group or organization with carrying out a secret plot” or “a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a covert group.” In all these cases, a conspiracy theory requires a conspiracy to make something happen or to keep something hidden. The cabal has to be hidden and the conspirators powerful; an accusation that some people got together to plan a crime doesn’t count as a conspiracy theory unless the perpetrators are extremely rich or powerful.
(more…)

Choosing your usage battles

This entry was posted in Writing on by

Words have specific meanings. Words change. These are both true.

If people start using a word in a way that doesn’t match its established meanings, how should you react? You can say it’s wrong, but eventually it could become so well-established that fighting it is senseless. Sometimes people need a word for a new concept and appropriate an existing one because it’s a good analogy. When vehicles pushed through the air by motors were developed, they needed a name, and people called them “airships” even though they aren’t ships in the usual sense. Before the end of the 19th century, “spaceship” was coined by a similar process.

At the other end, words sometimes get new meanings for stupid or dishonest reasons. For instance, people of certain political persuasions call anyone they disagree with a “fascist,” without reference to the word’s actual, historical meaning. That’s just a smear tactic, and anyone who values precise communication should reject it. “Grooming” is another example of a word that should have a definite meaning but has turned into an undefined smear.
(more…)