Thus spake Jody Bilyeu: I'd draw a distinction here between grammarians, whatever those are, ... infinitive as a sign of poor proofreading or writerly incompetence. "Corrected"/ "uncorrected" implies that there is something

"Jody Bilyeu" (Email Removed) wrote on 08 Jan 2004: I'd draw a distinction here between grammarians, whatever those are, and editors and publishers, many of whom would take an easily corrected yet uncorrected split infinitive as a

Thus spake Jody Bilyeu: Are there really any living grammarians who say this? The split infinitive is a dead issue. I'd draw a distinction here between grammarians, whatever those are, and editors and publishers, many of whom would take an

Lately I read the drama "The ecstasy of Rita Joe" ... grammarians think the split infinitive should be avoided whenever possible? Are there really any living grammarians who say this? The split infinitive is a dead issue. I'd draw a

Isn't "stet" used only to cancel an inadvertent proofreading mark? ... not that I have had to cancel many inadvertent marks. I don't think "inadvertent" describes how we used it, in my editing days. That sounds to me

Isn't "stet" used only to cancel an inadvertent proofreading mark? ... not that I have had to cancel many inadvertent marks. Sheesh I've certainly had to cancel many, usually marking as I go, and before I read the whole sentence,

Isn't "stet" used only to cancel an inadvertent proofreading mark? ... not that I have had to cancel many inadvertent marks. I don't think "inadvertent" describes how we used it, in my editing days. That sounds to me

"Steve Hayes" wrote Not "stet" anymore? Last I heard, it was "stet" for typesetters/proofreaders, "sic" for authors. Isn't "stet" used only to cancel an inadvertent proofreading mark?

"Steve Hayes" wrote Not "stet" anymore? Last I heard, it was "stet" for typesetters/proofreaders, "sic" for authors. Isn't "stet" used only to cancel an inadvertent proofreading mark?

Most publishers' house styles require quotations to follow the original. ... that they are to be set as is by (sic). Not "stet" anymore? Last I heard, it was "stet" for typesetters/proofreaders, "sic" for authors.