All Comments on 'Tips for Better Writing'

But I can only agree about the misuse of the word "that."

First, regarding the back of the throat. The throat is a tube. One side of the tube, the "far side," is on the same side as the back of the head. The other side, the "near" side, is closer to the opening of the mouth. It's like looking over the top of a coffee mug, with a near side and far side. When something inserted into the mouth crosses the front of the throat as well as the open space at the center of the throat, it hits up against the back of the throat. What you have called the back is actually the bottom of the throat, where the esophagus joins the stomach.

Secondly, as a long time wearer of garter belts and panties, I can assure you that I am perfectly comfortable with the panties underneath. Unless they are big granny panties, they actually go below the garter belt, with the garter belt up closer to the waist. The panties, certainly when they are bikinis or thongs, come only part of the way up the hips. At least, that's how I wear them. I imagine you could do it the other way around, but I think that the garters would be less comfortable that way.

Just one gal's opinion. YMMV.

Gimlet E.

The frequent occurrence of 'dinning' for 'dining' is also grating.

Thank you for taking the time to bring us this - posts on the 'nuts and bolts' of writing are always welcome, to me at least, and I hope that writing it has given you an even deeper insight into your own writing.

5 *s for being so honest and helpful.

traci

While I sympathize with your peeves most of them are not technically incorrect but rather matters of usage or style.

I) The "back of the throat" is also the "back of the mouth" in a technical sense. Think of a cylinder with a bend in it, as when a person is standing upright. The "back" is not the bottom circular face but the far side of the vertical portion at the bend. Hence as soon as you pass the uvula you are at the "back of the throat." I have never heard the term used in any other way and as a proofreader I would never flag this.

II) Some people are sticklers for the "who" vs. "that" for relative pronoun usage but common usage has left that distinction far behind. You even admit you see this "everywhere in today's English grammar." As English is a living language, common usage can eventually change the correctness of a construction.

For example, the American Heritage Dictionary (3/E, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1993, p. 1540) states "It is entirely acceptable to write either the man that wanted to talk to you, or the man who wanted to talk to you." And in addition to the Bible, you will see Chaucer do the same thing (see Burchfield, R.W. ed. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Third edition. New York: Oxford, 1996, p. 773) so it is unclear when the distinction began.

Of course there is also the possibility that the speaker is unconsciously or deliberately using "that" rather than "who" as a way to dehumanize the antecedent. Once again, while I would certainly notice this, as a proofreader I wouldn't flag it unless I were especially close to the writer and knew he or she loved such subtle aspects of grammar.

III) Again my sympathies lie with yours but I will make a small quibble of my own. While the term "fantastic" is technically an adjective based on the word "fantasy," it now has a primary connotation of "wonderful," similar to the word "fabulous" (which itself is a form of the word "fable").

You could compare it to the evolution of the term "terrific" which now has almost no connection to its root word "terror;" meanwhile the similarly constructed "horrific" still retains the meaning of something "horrible." (Indeed, "terrific" and "terrible" are practically antonyms while "horrific" and "horrible" are synonyms!)

I agree that "surreal" has been overused of late but in some instances your alternates do not convey the same meaning. While all of your suggestions describe an unreal situation, surreality carries an additional connotation of a dissonance that can't be resolved. On other words, a surreal scene isn't even internally consistent. Unicorns in a meadow are imaginary or fanciful but when the unicorn suddenly melts into a metronome delivering the Gettysburg Address by semaphore it becomes surreal.

IV) The preferred placement of panties in regard to garter belts is purely one of taste. As they say, there is no disputing taste.

There is an inherent conflict between the design (which argues for panties underneath the garters) vs. usage (panties over the garters allows one to remove them without disturbing the garter belt). The weight that one gives to those concerns varies from person to person. I know someone who wears garter belts daily primarily because she finds them more comfortable than pantyhose. Accordingly quick removal is less of a factor for her. One of my exes always wore her panties underneath because, in addition to comfort, she considered the removal of her panties an aspect of foreplay to be drawn out. Another who preferred a quick encounter in a semi-public place placed a premium on quick removal without disturbing the rest of her outfit.

So those are my thoughts and reactions to your post. Thanks for the interesting topics. These are exactly the sorts of things one needs to discuss in order to become a better writer. Unfortunately, since many people engage in writing as a solitary pursuit these conversations rarely take place.

I actually am not in agreement with you on much of what you've written, largely for reasons others have already elucidated. I do think 'who' is preferable to 'that' in the examples you've given, however. The fact something may not be technically incorrect doesn't automatically make it equally good, in my opinion.

I really disagree with your opinion on the word 'surreal'. It's a very useful word that cannot easily be replaced.

One thing I'd like to add to the discussion as a pet peeve of mine is the failure of the vast majority of authors on this site to understand the difference between 'it's' and 'its'. It really disappoints me when I see an author I admire doesn't know something so basic to the understanding of the English language as that.

The failure of so many to understand the difference between 'then' and 'than' astounds me. Our educational system in the US is sorely lacking.

My personal favorite, and I have seen this everywhere including some major daily newspapers, is using the word "loose" when the proper spelling is "lose". It has come to point where I think writers who really mean loose will have to add an extra "o" to differentiate the words.

While all of the above comments are appropriate, true, and meaningful, all of you THAT have left comments apparently forget, WHO is writing these stories. They are not authors, biographers, or scholars, let alone English Majors, but real people, WHO have put into words, their imaginations and fantasies as THEY see it. Even if the stories were true, which most are not, some slack must be offered. Yes, it certainly would be helpful for the readers if at least the spelling was correct, but again, one must consider the source and the reason for the writing. If all stories were subjected to the above criteria, there would be very few posted for the rest of us to enjoy.

For me the writing issues on this site are usually the same ones that I find when I read back the emails that I sent out yesterday. My reading speed was never very good. So, anything that trips me up when reading really slows me down. On the other hand, I tend to read right through many of the problems that others are noticing. Missing or extra words seem to be what brings me to a stop most often. Proofreading by a second set of eyes would probably solve most of that.

The accidental use of homonyms or near homonyms is something I do all the time and have pretty much gotten used to in others' writing. That might be because my brain seems to works more with sounds than the shapes of the written words.

Some things I have seen that bothered me and/or slow me down:

1. one story used "Ho" in place of "Oh" about 50 times

2. the misuse of "literally" to provide emphasis has seeped in from the broadcast media

3. the accidental sudden, usually temporary, drastic change of a characters name

Generally, I love a lot of the stuff written here. I wish I was as inventive & comfortable w/ my native language as to be able to do what many of these writers can do.

Thanks to all the writers.

We all have our pet peeves as readers and we all have our own styles as writers. I have certainly been flamebroiled in more than a few public and private comments about how I write, and I have seen more than a few things in others' writings which cause my hair to turn gray a little faster.

That said, I think writers and readers alike need to think of the overall context in which any "errors" occur. Especially when the "errors" are in dialogue or in a letter/e-mail/poster/etc., there may be a good reason for their existence. Personally, I believe that a lot can be explained with context.

And then, of course, there are those situations where errors simply are not caught in either the writing or the editing process. That is definitely going to happen, especially on a site like Literotica. If these stories were being published and sold at Borders or fnac or any other major bookstore chain in the world, then certainly I would expect NO errors unless they are directly linked to context (a character's manner of speech, a poorly-worded marketing slogan in English printed on a poster in Toyko, etc.).

As a professional editor and journalism teacher of many years standing, thank you for posting this article. One thing you didn't cover: shorter paragraphs. While I'm not advocating single-sentence paragraphs (these aren't newspaper stories, after all), I would like to argue for shorter 'graphs. You may have been taught eight-sentence 'graphs, MLA style, in English Comp, have pity on your readers! Three- or four-sentence 'graphs are much easier to read; Paragraphs are a relatively modern conceit, after all. One other thing: When writing dialogue, remember that each person's dialogue should be in a separate paragraph.

To dooddlesdad; Didn't you mean 'concept' not 'conceit'? Talk about proofreading!

that this is primarily a site for amateur writers, and I'm an amateur myself, in the sense that I have never received payment for creative writing. (I have been paid for other writing.)

Lit is a wonderful opportunity for those who have never done so before, to learn how to write.

Personally I find my dictionaries and thesaurus to be my best friends as an aspiring writer. I use the Oxford and The Concise Scots Dictionaries, because I'm Scots. And Roget's Thesaurus. Others will use dictionaries appropriate to the variant of English of their own cultures.

I have to say though, that my biggest problem as a Scots writer on Lit, is coping with those who believe that US usage of English is the only acceptable one.

to vs too

then vs than

accept vs expect

alright vs all right

its vs it's

there vs their

waist vs waste

your vs you're, you are

I'll throw in on (I had to go back and remove the letter e from one because my fingers don't always do what my mind tries to tell them - read what you write) this subject, and the article. When I write I depend on MS Word to keep my typing and spelling semi-straight, but that is only for the original draft. I do my own proofing and editing and when I do I always have DICTIONARY.COM up and I use it. One of the traits I notice about my writing is that I tend to use certain constructs and phrases repeatedly, naturally, and in editing passes I have to modify to keep the language flowing and alive. We do have a rich and maleable language and we should revel in it and use it fully.

Some of the same word selections that bug JohnBoy9 bug me; I especially seem to notice the shutter usage. There are other words and spellings that I am sure represent slight differences in the Queen's English as oppossed to the President's English. One that jumps out to me is cloths vs clothes as the plural for an article of clothing. I try not to impose my brand of language on others as long as the others follow something approaching literate usage.

The single biggest improvement in writing craftmanship any author can make is to increase the time spent on the final draft transition from rough draft. When I write, I will make at least two thorough passes through each chapter, often three, doing nothing but looking for misspellings, punctuation problems, confusing constructs and poor word choice. I estimate that thirty percent of my writing time is spent in editing. Readers may not care for my subject matter, but they shouldn't be bludgeoned with bad grammer.

One of the things I find most erroneous and irritating in submissions to Literotica is the use of the term sperm in describing male ejaculate-cum. The proper term is semen the bulk of which is produced by the prostate and the vesicle glands that surround it. Sperm makes up less than ten percent of that stuff that gives such pleasure when we release it deep in a warm vagina, up a tight ass, in a waiiting mouth or even when we masturbate and gleefully watch it erupt. It is of course the part that supplies those baby making little tadpoles, so be careful all you motherfuckers. Don't ever pass up any pussy-just be careful.

Its P R O S T A T E......NOT prostRate!!!...and spell check is good, but its not a grammar check!!

i) No idea, it feels like the tip is down in her kidneys to me.

ii) Gramatically incorect statements, are the norm in everyday converstaion, they are inappropriate in writings for children as they reinforce the idea that ungrammatical is ok but in Erotic or Adult fiction granatically correct statements or speeches just make a story un believeable.

Gramatically incorrect descriptions are another matter...

Spelling, I use Abiword or Ms word spellcheck and am always being criticised for poor spelling, I supppose (guess) that because I don't (do not) write in English (Merican) as taught in the US of A where Germano-English reigns, Burglarized, they say Burglarized for shucks sake, its Burgled. No Z. OK? And when I write in adapted 19th Century (like I use You where it should be Thee to make it easier to undersand) some Americans apparently cannot cope at all!

iii) Incorrect words, well So cal slang turns me right off.

And when they mix up comptroller and controller, but half the time it is MS word altering a good word to a bad one and we all miss the e off one and get on, or inn of in, and no I don't spend days editing mine, life's too short!

Surreal,

"Lisa had never been in such a surreal situation." needs "But" added

"Lisa could never have imagined herself to have been caught up in such a fantastic situation. The whole thing boggles the mind." is ugly and meaningless.

Unreal thats George Orwell 1984, Ungood Double plus Ungood.

Surreal suggests towering green marshmallow elephants, unreal is the Lib Dem, (Democratic Party) Manifesto.

iiii) Panties.

Stockings with suspenders hang much more easily outside the panties, and the tapes can be snapped on and off the stocking very quickly and easily when nature or a penis calls.

Also when the suspender tapes are inside the panties they can make the panties slip down, ok large knickers of bloomers worn by Octogenarian matrons are probably better worn outside the tapes, but Google Stockings suspenders and panties and check it out.

Incidentally, if you go back to the victorian era of big skirts women didn't wear knickers at all, with that mass of Petticoats and skirts they simply couldnt get at them to pull them up.

We all have english idiom. I have a Camb old style English qualification, and 2 others, from when it was like being put through a mangle while skipping, over paragraphs. In Grammar Analysis the main advantage was, and is, to identify types of errors, or author's styles, then to be able to discuss such meaningfully. Work in a report free environment and among a mix of different languages, followed by an old style english Senior, frictions, and only casual full on legal use, led changes and evolution. Now my english is almost foreign to my own youth. I still stretch Word and spell check to the limit. I used to get books out to proof things to myself! This became increasingly disturbing. I stopped. Now when I see critiques my mind automatically emphasises the critics idiom, in adding my own thoughts. This comment is as personal as the others made here. There are useful tips especially 31/12. To prepare for or expect a need to rewrite or serious edit is a Golden rule. I used to recommend a minimum 3 day gap between write and review. Then warn that perfection was an occasional accident... One of my major concerns regards the matching of language use to character. I suspect this falls victim to 'proper' english. In 90%+ of stories people appear proper middle country English caucasian. While enjoying sexual union. Even here I laugh at my avoidance of proper use of the F' word. Then to NOTE non-consensual sex is nearly always rape. That the best sex is, at limit, gently rough, and to help some authors work towards

humanity. Compared to most sex related sites, as I have noted many times, the standards of Lit submissions and editing is supreme. I have mainstream experience. However only just recently I identified writers setting age parameters which did not match the setting, purposely. Age IS just a number, in so many things but the Law is set to stop desperates, devious, and the depraved, from taking advantage of the naive or innocent, or otherwise disadvantaged. If a site promoting positive sexual interest, and activities, can guide some minds, and promote Respect as not only adjunct to the Best physical experiences but essential to such, a life just might be saved. Distinct from moral insanity which still means professional sex workers are forced to put their safety at risk in so many ways, and to let the criminal elements run free, as to occasionally justify a whole council, or Gov't Dept. being put against a wall. Given military law!! Be honest, if you do not think you can produce the english engage with the Edit section, if you do not think you can even do this, it is unlikely you can produce a meaningful tale. Although even reading commentary sets a positive chance. Which brings me to another Golden rule; Interest and sustain are paramount, and this site is based around erotica, Not frustrated authors. Oh and in any tech medium, try sending it to yourself first to see various posting effects. I always advise anyway to copy any public domain article back to yourself and save it, with a date reference. In case you have complaint. Happy New Year, and if an unusual or best, best sexual experience crosses your path, go on, give writing about it a go, while preserving some anonymity/privacy. It's not Your embarrassment or safety at risk, its' all and every mentioned. Best pen wishes.

No, I meant "conceit" as in "vanity." In the time of Charlemagne, all writings were in one long piece, since the idea of the paragraph didn't exist. Since then, the lengths of paragraphs have varied by the "conceit" of the writer(s). MLA wants the six- to eight-sentence paragraph to cover a concept within an essay. The problem with that is those paragraphs are no more meant to be read (except by pedagogues)than George Lucas' dialogue is meant to be spoken in "Star Wars" (according to Carrie Fisher). It's a lot easier on the reader to break material into shorter blocks.

I beleived when finding this sit that it was for normal everyday people to relay their experiences or fantacies for others to read and enjoy.

So, being as such I was not expecting perfection in writing styles, or even in spelling, and as long as the story interests me I will in most cases read it warts and all, as in many cases it is like listening to the person telling me by word of mouth.

We were not all given the advantage of university education, nor did we all want it, being in need of earning a wage as soon as possible.

It seems there are too many critics, HOW about you doing more writing???. Live and let live.

Personally I have had a few stories accepted on here, but, have had many problems to get there, and have had many more refused and have now given up trying, especially after seeing some that have been passed.

We come from all walks of life, and all levels of education, with all sorts of sexual pasts. I do not expect all I meet to speak alike so why should I expect them to write alike?????.

You may want to add pallet / palate to the list. ...Unless the writer is describing some avant garde artist who mixes paints on his tongue.

To the apologists who claim that not all of us have a college education, it may come as a surprise that the examples the author of this essay presented should have been covered in fifth grade English. It's indeed a sad commentary on the state of our public education if a skill this basic needed to be addressed in college.

It actually keeps me from writing because each time I start I have to go back and relearn how to do it. It is misspelling and use of the wrong homonyms that irritates me.

Herll Yes! Have I seen some horrendous crimes against grammar on this site and everywhere else. Time was journalists had tyo have an exemplary (using the word correctly) command of English. Not so now, it seems. Any school leaver can become a journo! Thanks internet. Some misuses I find nausiating:

The sky sparkled with a Myria of stars - No it doesn't. It sparked with myriad stars. (No "a" no "of")

Her diary was comprise of descriptions of boys. No it didn't. Her diary comprise descriptions of boys. If it contained anything else, then the word is "contained" and not "comprised."

If fact any "posh" word that the writer believes will make them sound more educated, usually doesn't.

Another pet hate - get off of me. Even Webster's famous American dictionaries consider that bad form.

And don't get me started on which v that.