A proofreading reader

[txsportsscribe]

Fossy, if buss is an exception because you've decided it is an exception because you don't want to be wrong to a reader, that's silly and pretty petty. If you're going to make an exception, there needs to be a better reason. Expect more letters if you stick with your exception.

exactly. you were wrong. the lady was right. you didn't even know "buss" meant "kiss" before but now it's your paper's style? please, it appears now that you're just making up rules because you don't want to admit that you were wrong on a very journalism 101 issue.

 

[Mystery Meat II]

 

[jfs1000]

I'll stick with busses, thank you, especially since her written message asked me to check with Webster and Webster agreed with both of us. Maybe AP should check with Webster as well. We'll just let it go as our paper's style.
And it was a written message, not a call.
Also, I'd never heard of "buss" being a kiss until today.
For what it's worth, I also checked with Merriam-Webster, which also gave "busses" as an acceptable version.
M-W also had several other definitions for buss — a rugged square-sailed boat; two for kiss; bush; and a version of busk, which is to prepare or make ready — while listing "bussy" as a sweetheart.
Accordingly, I could buss to buss my bussy's buss on my buss.
:-*

AP Stylebook is the bible. Your wrong in this case because the default style is AP in newspaper unless your paper makes an exception. AP stylebook is first reference. If there is no entry there, then you go to an American Dictionary. That's the rule. Your usage is incorrect in journalistic style. It's enough of an issue that AP made a style entry for it. So before you give yourself credit for sticking it to a reader, you should at least understand that your usage in a newspaper was incorrect.

Put it this way, if that appeared on the AP Copy Editing exam, and you used busses, it would have been a wrong answer.

If AP is the bible, what's NY Times' style?

The Koran? Ha. If your paper follows NT Times style, then that's the bible.

Style should be treated like a divine manuscript. If you choose to follow and adhere to it, you can't follow it some of the time. If the paper made an exception, then it's an exception to style and it's worth telling the reader that. But, if there is no exception, you can't make one up.

Style Nazi here, I know.

 

[reformedhack]

Our paper does make the exception so it is our paper's style.

OK, but I wonder if your newspaper also hyphenates the word "to-day" and refers to certain fast-food delicacies as "hamburger sandwiches."

If it is, indeed, your paper's style to spell "buses" as "busses" -- and every writer and editor at the paper follows this exception to the AP Stylebook and uses the long-out-of-date spelling -- that's fine. A little odd, but fine. But the next time the plural of the word "bus" appears in your newspaper, it'd better have three S's.

Even so, the old lady was right ... or at least current with the times.

 

[Stitch]

If the word was ihe paper's style, why look it up in the dictionary then? I go by the stylebook first and dictionary second.

 

[BillyT]

*****

Style Nazi here, I know.

*****

People who really care about proper writing and words don't use offensive words like that.


[/quote]

 

[RickStain]

Style is overrated by lazy people who think that memorizing a bunch of rules is a shortcut to quality writing.

But in this case, OP is sticking with a poor but not completely incorrect choice out of obstinance.

 

[KJIM]

Another reason to complain about an old lady.

I can't help but wonder if the (proof)reader had been a 27-year-old man if this would even be a topic.

 

[reformedhack]

Style is overrated by lazy people who think that memorizing a bunch of rules is a shortcut to quality writing.

Nonsense.

Quality writing has nothing to do with a stylebook. You can still write great stuff and observe the agreed-upon guidelines for grammar, spelling and usage.

 

[jfs1000]

Style is overrated by lazy people who think that memorizing a bunch of rules is a shortcut to quality writing.

Nonsense.

Quality writing has nothing to do with a stylebook. You can still write great stuff and observe the agreed-upon guidelines for grammar, spelling and usage.

I agree here. Style is important because it brings uniformity to writing. It makes for much cleaner copy. You can't have people spelling things in different ways at the same paper.

People who don't like style are lazy because they don't want to go to the book and look it up. Is it really that hard to file style guidelines?

And on calling myself a style nazi -- lighten up. It was said in jest.

 

[txsportsscribe]

Style is overrated by lazy people who think that memorizing a bunch of rules is a shortcut to quality writing.

ridiculous

But in this case, OP is sticking with a poor but not completely incorrect choice out of obstinance.

very true. and i'd like to see the other times the o.p.'s paper has used "busses."

 

[RickStain]

Style is overrated by lazy people who think that memorizing a bunch of rules is a shortcut to quality writing.

Nonsense.

Quality writing has nothing to do with a stylebook. You can still write great stuff and observe the agreed-upon guidelines for grammar, spelling and usage.

Style has nothing to do with grammar, and it's at best tangential to spelling and usage. People can't tell the difference between style, grammar, spelling and usage are what get on my nerves.