(Copied from the previous thread, because I realised that it had reached 26 pages.)

I have just finished reading a book where the main character has a baby. At the time of its birth, the parents both state explicitly that he will be given the name 'James' and this is used initially.

A couple of chapters later, the baby's name suddenly and inexplicably changes to 'Charles' and he is referred to by that name for the rest of the book.

On first reading the name change, I thought maybe I had been mistaken, so I went back to check.

Surely this is a mistake that the copy editor should have picked up, even if the author or the proofreader didn't?

_________________
''He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." Jim Elliot

Definitely - though I suspect most fiction never darkens a copy-editor's door

My new book has been through my eyes, my daughter's, commissioning editor, actual editor, me again, copy editor, proof reader, me again, formatter - and now, when I read the actual ebook when it came out on Tuesday, what do I find, but TWO dates that are wrong. One is just a silly typo that one of us should have spotted and one is an actual historical date that I should have spotted as wrong because I know the right one perfectly well. Still, ebooks can and will be corrected and so will the paperback in due course. Sigh...

_________________
http://nicolaslade.wordpress.com/

Yes, I noticed the historical on in the back pages...

_________________
to be nobody but yourself - in a world which is doing its best, night and day, to make you everybody else - means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting.
e.e.cummings
http://stitchwords.blogspot.co.uk

Oh what a nuisance Nicky. I shall keep an eye out for them...

As someone who does a fair amount of proof-reading I know how easy it is for things to slip past many eyes.

Think of me - I am about to check a translation of an expert analysis of what is in a bottle of rum I wasn't allowed to take even O level chemistry......

_________________
Cestina's dolls houses - Curtain Up!

One of the museum leaflets about children' s activities had a typo that got through six of us, at least two of whom were practised and sharp-eyed proof-readers. What was it? 'Chineses Whispers'! - only too appropriate, alas...

John Lewis shops are selling Moz the Monster this Christmas as some of you have no doubt seen. The blurb next to the pile says a share of the profits will go to Dr Barnado's. The same notice also has Barnardo's spelt correctly in smaller print at the bottom!

Just seen this post on Facebook, "The kitten loves the ballballs on the Christmas tree". Quite like this spelling!

I'm still waiting for answers from certain newspapers whose journalists have obviously never heard of the comparison of adjectives and adverbs.

RIP English Grammar.

_________________
Carpe diem, carpe noctem, carpe pecuniam et exe, celerrime.
A certain edge when she spoke of Mrs Maynard, certainly, but, after all, not everyone could love Joey.
'Life,' said Marvin, 'don't talk to me about life!'

Can't remember which one, but I was a little surprised when one of the television channels informed me in advance that, "This programme contains language."

Oh good!

Given how many Facebook users in a recent thread claim to detest 'I would of' used for 'I would have' (and I agree) how is it that it's so prevalent?

I'd heard years sgo that it costs the author £50 to have a word changed in a book if it's not edited first time around. I don't know how true this is.

_________________
Wishes the land of Merlin and magic was real

From The Author's Desk Book (1914, p. 67):

Cost would be nowhere near the same today as then - must be all electronic now.

Sheer laziness in the way folk speak? When I started teaching in Manchester in the 60s I found it very prevalent in the children's writing back then, but they did speak it that way, so obviously that's the way they would spell it. It was almost impossible to eradicate. I thought it was just a Mancunian idiosyncracy, but now clearly not.

By the same token, Noreen, you could ask how *I was sat* and *I was stood* have become so prevalent? Those seem to have developed quite rapidly, and I've even heard a local Head Teacher use them on a daily basis with her pupils!! If all Heads are doing that, then.... I know language evolves, but those two phrases are not even grammatical.

_________________
"It takes a long time to live what you learn." May Sarton

"I was sat" and "I was stood" are pretty standard Northern dialect, so I don't have a problem with them, but "would of" instead of "would have" is incorrect - it's "would've" being mispronounced as something completely different . I remember my best friend at school getting into trouble for writing "would of" instead of "would have" all through something at school, but "would've" and "would of" sound so similar that it's no wonder kids get confused.

This is an old chestnut, but I am so fed up of seeing apostrophes where they don't belong .

_________________
We really must stop eating like this ...

Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open.

http://setinthepast.wordpress.com/

I don't know, Mary - as Alison commented, it's standard in a number of dialects, so perhaps has come with the wider acceptance of regional accents. I suppose it's a good example of the complicated nature of English, too, since "I was seated" is correct!

Ah yes, that ranks nicely alongside "There is a lot of weather about tonight..."

_________________
Cestina's dolls houses - Curtain Up!

I worked for on my local newspaper's copy desk for more than a decade. In that time, staffing fell by about half and most of us were doing the job of two or three different people every night. We also took on additional digital duties as the internet and social media became more prevalent. We were expected to meet the same deadlines and perform the same level of work as before, but with fewer and less experienced (ie. cheaper) workers.

I don't know what the newspaper industry is like in your area, but if it's anything like a lot of newspapers in the U.S., it's not that journalists don't know grammar, it's that they are trying to produce and edit at unsustainable rates. Our readership would rag us when typos and grammatical errors published in stories, but the sad truth was we were trying to do at least twice the amount of work as usual in the same time.

_________________
"I -- I didn't think!" -- Carola Johnstone

I've just read a book in which horses and riding play a prominent part - and in which people wear "jhodpurs" all the way through...