Self-Appointed Grammar Police vs. Editors

by Randy Murray on July 4, 2013

Many people, myself included, get annoyed when people correct my word usage. This is especially aggravating when it’s done in person, interrupting our speech to correct what we might have said.

Frankly, it’s impolite. And it’s a good way to get someone to not want to talk to you at all. If you do this, learn to grit your teeth and resist the urge to interrupt and correct someone.

It’s also common in online forums to see individuals arguing a point, only to be interrupted by the “Grammar Nazis” to argue word use or punctuation, not the point of the argument. It’s a very passive-aggressive approach and shouts, “I’m smarter than you are!” But not smart enough to keep your mouth shut, are you?

We could use many fewer of these self-appointed protectors of the language. I myself argue word usage from time to time. It’s an unsatisfying occupation for everyone involved. I’m almost always sorry when I yield to this temptation and I apologize if you’ve been the brunt of one of my tantrums.

An editor, on the other hand, is neither uninvited nor interrupting. This person has agreed to review and correct a text. It’s their job to do this work. I welcome having my copy corrected. I do not become annoyed by it. I require it.

Frankly, I don’t care for the self-appointed grammar police.  Being forcibly interrupted and corrected off the topic is not a pleasant experience.

My advice: find and embrace an editor.  Don’t mistake an editor for the self-appointed grammar police.

The Self-Appointed Grammar Police vs. Editors by Randy Murray, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: