http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/ Introducing brilliant authors to the blogosphere. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 22:43:07 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-147792 Building the Ultimate Spelling Bee : OUPblog Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:56:28 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-147792 [...] English Corpus has been particularly useful in tracking English usage, illuminating everything from spelling errors to shifting idioms to innovative combining forms like -licious. In my new job, I still get the [...] [...] English Corpus has been particularly useful in tracking English usage, illuminating everything from spelling errors to shifting idioms to innovative combining forms like -licious. In my new job, I still get the [...]

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-21179 Serge Lubomudrov Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:06:57 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-21179 If I may, Ben, to post a slightly off-topic comment ... I've started to read books on Soviet and Russian history comparatively recently, and most of these books are published within the last decade or two. I've noticed that there are A LOT of errors in transliterated Russian words and phrases. Rossicum est, non legitur, indeed. Don't you guys (publishers, I mean) use proofreaders any more? And why transliterate at all? What respectable publisher of a book on classics would transliterate Greek? Cyrillic typefaces are readily available; people who don't read Russian will not bother to struggle through neither original nor translit, so ... why? If I may, Ben, to post a slightly off-topic comment … I’ve started to read books on Soviet and Russian history comparatively recently, and most of these books are published within the last decade or two. I’ve noticed that there are A LOT of errors in transliterated Russian words and phrases. Rossicum est, non legitur, indeed. Don’t you guys (publishers, I mean) use proofreaders any more? And why transliterate at all? What respectable publisher of a book on classics would transliterate Greek? Cyrillic typefaces are readily available; people who don’t read Russian will not bother to struggle through neither original nor translit, so … why?

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-16279 Shifting Idioms: An Eggcornucopia : OUPblog Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:02:37 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-16279 [...] our last installment, I noted that the increasingly common spelling of minuscule as miniscule is not just your average [...] [...] our last installment, I noted that the increasingly common spelling of minuscule as miniscule is not just your average [...]

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-14674 Jean S. Cain Fri, 06 Jul 2007 15:18:36 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-14674 Ben -- Love your column. Just now, while editing a document at work, I had to correct a somewhat understandable confusion of words: "hone in on" used instead of "home in on." I did a quick Google usage check and was surprised at how often "hone in on" occurred. Ben — Love your column.
Just now, while editing a document at work, I had to correct a somewhat understandable confusion of words: “hone in on” used instead of “home in on.” I did a quick Google usage check and was surprised at how often “hone in on” occurred.

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-14577 mike peebles Fri, 06 Jul 2007 03:30:27 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-14577 You sir, are "The Bomb" ! You sir, are “The Bomb” !

]]> http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/comment-page-1/#comment-14543 Adrian Hughes Fri, 06 Jul 2007 00:08:00 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/2007/07/spelling/#comment-14543 re: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (”Harry saw that the little square for June thirteenth seemed to have turned into a miniscule television screen”).... is there any way of ascertaining the source of this spelling? ie: was it at the creative or editorial level? Does it read the same in the UK version? American versions flip "honour" for "honor", "centre" for "center" and "flautist" for "flutist"; why not "minuscule" for "miniscule"? re: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (”Harry saw that the little square for June thirteenth seemed to have turned into a miniscule television screen”)…. is there any way of ascertaining the source of this spelling? ie: was it at the creative or editorial level? Does it read the same in the UK version? American versions flip “honour” for “honor”, “centre” for “center” and “flautist” for “flutist”; why not “minuscule” for “miniscule”?

]]>