Arlene Miller, blogger on bigwords101.com, discussed the history and current usage of how cuss words are altered in writing as well as on television and radio. Grawlix, which refers to strings of symbols that are often used in place of cuss words, date back to comic books from the 1880s. However, the term wasn’t coined until the 1960s. Sometimes this is referred to as profanitype, however that is just a slang term for grawlix.
In modern days, many different versions of grawlix are used. Oftentimes, a single asterisk is used to replace a central vowel in the cuss word. Common symbols that are used include &, #, %, !, @, and ?.
The Federal Communications Commission has restrictions on what can be said on television and radio. Broadcasters typically replace a cuss word with an audible beep which is now referred to as “bleeping” something out.
In the article, Arlene Miller mentions last how many authors, producers, and broadcasters will replace the swear with a more acceptable replacement term such as jerk, heck, or gosh, allowing them to get their point across in a more appropriate manner.
Perhaps you’re familiar with the concept and use of citations from your schoolwork, or have seen them used in publications. Some of you may not even think twice about citing a source, while others may not be sure, or may simply forget, especially if what you’re writing is informal, and won’t be seen by anyone but your Facebook friends. But it’s important to remember to include the source of your material. It not only makes you appear credible, but it acknowledges the original source of information, which isn’t your own.
But how do you know what is determined to be a credible source? Grammar Girl says it is “subjective” to the reader, and to use “common sense,” but she also offers a few invaluable tips to help you:
1. Find out more about the author(s). What are their credentials? Are they an expert in the subject? What sources do they cite in their work, and are others citing them?
2. Take a look at the layout, design, and overall writing of the source. When was it written, is the information on the page out of date? Check spelling, grammar, and typos. Too many could indicate lack of credibility. Another red flag could be whether the information is designed to sell you something, or if it’s too good to be true.
These are some good ways to help you determine source credibility.
I am certain many of you have tried to cite a source, and when trying to access the source, find that it has disappeared and is no longer available. It’s recommended that you save the file, save the entire page, or check a personal favorite tool in my arsenal called the Wayback Machine. On the Internet Archive site is also a way to save websites so that they don’t disappear.
Up-to-date information of standards on how to cite electronic sources can be found at:
– Modern Language Association (MLA)
– American Psychological Association (APA)
– The Chicago Manual of Style (CMS)
– The Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL)
Don’t be discouraged to use and cite any kind of electronic sources. With these resources, you will be able to cite anything, no matter what you’re writing.
– Amy Platteter
Fogarty, M. (2017, January 19). Citing podcasts and websites. Retrieved from http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/citing-podcasts-and-websites
People have a choice to decide whether they chose to read in print or electronically. Electronic texts are generally much cheaper than the actual hard copy. While college tuition is expensive to begin with, adding the cost of books only makes it worse. Therefore students will buy E-texts because of the lower cost. Students use E-textbooks for convenience, they don’t have to lug around textbooks rather just carry a tablet or laptop. But do people read as well on a screen than paper? According to an article from the NY Times, “Reading Literature on Screen: A Price for Convenience?” a study suggest that reading on a screen is less effective than reading on paper. Researchers study the differences between reading on a tablet and in print. The study took place in Norway, where 50 graduate students were asked to read the same short story by Elizabeth George, and were tested on it afterward. The results clearly show that the students who read on paper did better than those who read off a screen. The students who read off the screen had a lower retention on the material than those who read from print. “They [students who used E-text] also performed almost twice as poorly when asked to arrange 14 plot points in the correct sequence.” The students who read off the E-text were unable to provide specific in-depth questions about plots. Students should consider which type of textbook best fits them, but remember that retaining specific information is much easier from print than E-text.
One of bloggers I chose to follow was Tristan Bishop, one of his recent blogs was “Winning the Social Media Superbowl”. In this blog Tristan uses images to connect the game of football to having a positive social media presence. He also compares social media marketing to running an offense and social customer service to coordinating a defense. In his blog he talks about “covering the whole field” and by that he went on to talk about sites and blogs, social channels and public conversations. Tristan also discussed that “offensively” you need to be able to promote and share your company’s products and ideas while “defensively” you need to be able to quickly respond to public customer challenges. And “recapping the season” is where you would asses where you are after a quarter, what did the company do well, where the company can improve and then set goals for the next “season”. This blog mad a lot of really strong connections between something I am familiar with, football, and not so familiar concepts such social marketing and social support. I thought this blog was really well composed and informational.
By Tallon Rood