Grammar, Capitalisation, Canon issues, etc

[mudbloodproud]

Have a question about grammar? Punctuation? Or need to know if a word should be capitalised? Stuck on a quick canon fact? Well, this is the thread to ask your questions in.

Many Potter words are capitalised in the British versions but not in the American. Generally it is preferable to use the British versions as your guideline.

So, ask away and we will answer you questions.

Thank you to BB for the suggestion of this thread.

[padfoot_returns]

Oh, this is a great thread idea, BB!

I've always had this question. Is common room capitalized or not? I *think* it was capitalized in the earlier books but it wasn't capitalized in DH. I would have expected it to be something that would be capitalized but its not in DH but who knows. I only the American versions of the books. Thanks to whoever will answer (if someone will lol) :D:D

xxRiham

[mudbloodproud]

I always thought it was supposed to be, but on the official list us mod types refer to, it isn't capitalised. So, common room or common-room. Though most don't use the hyphen.

[Silverah]

What about series-specific nouns like "muggle" and "squib"? And species like "goblin" and "centaur" and "werewolf"? I'm never sure about whether these are considered to be proper nouns or not. They're persons or things, but they're also names. :confused:

[Inverarity]

There is a well-known LJ compendium of Potterwords, detailing which words are capitalized in the books and which words are not. I know you allow Wikipedia links -- perhaps an exception to the no-outside-linking rule would also be appropriate for other reference materials.

Rowling herself was not always consistent. Some words get capitalized in some places and not in others. Her style is particularly frustrating with regards to magical creatures, since you pretty much need to consult a reference list to know which ones get capitalized and which ones don't, as there is no consistent rule to rely on.

(This is also a pain when you make up your own magical creatures in fan fictions, and then you mix them in sentences with existing Potter creatures which might not be capitalized/uncapitalized the same way.)

Also, some words are capitalized or not -- differently -- in the American and British editions.

[Equinox Chick]

In the British versions, the Trio drink Butterbeer and Sirius drinks Firewhisky. But in the American versions they drink butterbeer and firewhisky.

Also, Harry says 'There's no need to call me "sir", Professor.'

but in America he'd say 'Sir' - is that right?

Carole

[luinrina]

Proper names Rowling invented - like "Muggle", "Squib" or "Quidditch" - are capitalised in the British edition.

A mnemonic rhyme of myself is that creatures like "centaurs", "werewolves" and "goblins", that exist in our own myths and legends, are written in lower case whereas invented creatures like "Dementors" are capitalised (at least in the British editions). Though, in doubt, I always consult the books first.

[Silverah]

A mnemonic rhyme of myself is that creatures like "centaurs", "werewolves" and "goblins", that exist in our own myths and legends, are written in lower case whereas invented creatures like "Dementors" are capitalised (at least in the British editions). Though, in doubt, I always consult the books first.

I can see that as good reasoning. I don't think any of them are capitalized in the American editions - is there any preference on MNFF as to whether we use American or British grammatical rules?

Um, I'm not sure, but I think 'sir' would still be lowercase. However, yes, the quotation marks are switched, so instead of 'No need to call me "sir", Professor.' we have "No need to call me 'sir', Professor." Personally, I think that once you really pause to think about it, the British way of quoting makes more sense logically, but depending on where you learned the language one or the other feels more natural. Very few books make it to the United States with the original marks intact. (Actually, I can only recall one series that doesn't have them changed.)

Which brings me to my next question...

Should American writers strive to use British quotation marks? Or is this just needlessly specific?

[Inverarity]

"Sir" and "Ma'am" aren't usually capitalized in American English either, though I'm too lazy to check my books and right now and see if they were there.

A mnemonic rhyme of myself is that creatures like "centaurs", "werewolves" and "goblins", that exist in our own myths and legends, are written in lower case whereas invented creatures like "Dementors" are capitalised (at least in the British editions). Though, in doubt, I always consult the books first.

Unfortunately, that rule isn't always true. There are many creatures Rowling didn't invent that are capitalized in the British edition, while most creatures don't get capitalized in the American edition.

[luinrina]

I can see that as good reasoning. I don't think any of them are capitalized in the American editions - is there any preference on MNFF as to whether we use American or British grammatical rules?

Should American writers strive to use British quotation marks? Or is this just needlessly specific?
Because the books are originally British, we prefer British English, though, we don't reject for using American English if you keep it consistent, meaning, don't mix British and American English in one story.

The same applies to quotation marks. I have seen authors use British English but double quotation marks. It doesn't matter which you choose as long as it's consistent throughout your story.


Inverarity, yes, I know this mnemoric rhyme isn't always true. But for me it worked so far quite well. Might be because I rarely use creatures' names lol. And if I should use a creature where I'm not sure how it's written, I always consult the book or my beta (who knows such things :D).

[Salmantino7]

I was wondering if in a disclaimer for, say a historical fic, should you include anything about real people that may appear in the story. For example, if you're writing about Pablo Picasso as a wizard, do you need to include in the disclaimer that he was a real person and not your invention, or not? I realize this may be a ridiculous question, but please answer! Thanks!

[sorrow_of_severus]

I'm not sure that a disclaimer is needed. If it really bothers you, you could put in your author's note, "________ (the person) was real, lived in _________ (country or country and city) from _________ to ________ (years), and was well known for doing _________." Of course, it varies by person. I'm pretty sure we all know that people like Shakespeare or Julius Caesar were real and know the basic facts about their lives.

[A.H.]

Also, Harry says 'There's no need to call me "sir", Professor.'

but in America he'd say 'Sir' - is that right?

Carole

If 'sir' was replacing a proper noun, it would be capitalized. However, if it's pre/proceeding a proper noun, it's not capitalized.

So this:

"I was wondering, Sir, if you could tell me..."

is right, whereas this:

"I was wondering, Professor Dumbledore Sir, if you could tell me..."

is wrong. Same goes for 'ma'am', and also 'mom' and 'dad' (the latter two I didn't know until recently). Generally, if something is replacing a proper noun, it is always capitalized, because said proper noun would be capitalized.

-Ari-

[A.H.]

Double posting (:o) with a quick question: Is 'dress robes' capitalized?

Sorry. :)

-Ari-

EDIT: Thanks, Inverarity. -squeesh-

[Inverarity]

Double posting (:o) with a quick question: Is 'dress robes' capitalized?

Sorry. :)

-Ari-


Not in the American edition, and it doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would be capitalized in any context -- they aren't a brand, a proper noun, or a Rowling invention.

[Padfoot Patronus]

This is the closest place where I can get multiple views on my query:

I'm wondering what you think of the verb 'Marauded'? It's not very common, is it? Ms Word didn't recognise it as a word, and I got an underline. But I opened an online dictionary and it is a verb sure. But what about its use. Do you think it is very redundant?

- Akay

[Sainyn Swiftfoot]

Both Wiktionary and Encarta say that "marauded" is the simple past form of "maraud", so I suppose it's probably right.

BB

[inspirations]

Hey, guys,

I was wondering, you know when you use a spell's name in your story? Well, do you always have to italicise it? When a person says it directly, yes? What about if it were more like this:

The Avada Kedavra is one of the three unforgivable curses.

Rubbish example, but is it right? Basically... do you always italicise a spell's name in the text, or are there any exceptions?

-hugs- Thanks in advance!

[Sainyn Swiftfoot]

Technically, the name of the curse isn't Avada Kedavra, it's the Killing Curse, so it might be a good idea to use that instead...

I've always had it drilled in me by betas and mods that spells have to be italicised, but I'm not really sure. :D

BB

[coolh5000]

I would agree with BB that most spells have names and it is better to use those (not italicised) than use the incantation to describe the spell. I'm not sure about whether incantations should be italicised when not in direct speech, because I can't think of an example at the moment where the incantation is referred to without it being cast.

[[la_vie_boheme]]

I was wondering, since I've only read the American versions and don't want to get this horribly wrong, how you would word dates in British English.

Like, in American English, you would say "September 1st" but how would you say it in British English? Would it just be "the 1st of September?"

[TheCursedQuill]

Well, I'm not British or anything, but seeing as JK uses the date for the start of class as "1 September" in the British edition, then I'm pretty sure that's how you would use it :) . She also uses 31 July in the next sentance, so I'm positive this is how you would phrase it.

[luinrina]

Well, I'm not British or anything, but seeing as JK uses the date for the start of class as "1 September" in the British edition, then I'm pretty sure that's how you would use it :) . She also uses 31 July in the next sentance, so I'm positive this is how you would phrase it.
In letters that would be totally fine. However, in narration, you'd rather write "At the first of September, Harry woke up, feeling all excited." or something along that line.

[Equinox Chick]

As a Brit, we write our dates as day/month/year, but we'd often say something like

"My birthday is March the twenty-first." There's no set rule about it, except when writing the date as a number as I explained above.


I would agree with BB that most spells have names and it is better to use those (not italicised) than use the incantation to describe the spell. I'm not sure about whether incantations should be italicised when not in direct speech, because I can't think of an example at the moment where the incantation is referred to without it being cast.

Moody in GOF The Unforgiveable Curses says

"Yes, the last and worst. Avada Kedavra ... the killing curse.

As you can see the spell is italicised in that bit.Hermione also refers to the spell a line or two earlier and it's also italicised. So I think it's fair to say that if Harry is asking Ron to cast the Cruciatus Curse, he'd say.

"Ron, cast Crucio on Malfoy for me, will you?"

Carole

[Padfoot Patronus]

mum, dad - capitalised or not? They are capitalised in my American version DH. What d'you say?

-Akay-

[iamlordvoldemort]

mum, dad - capitalised or not? They are capitalised in my American version DH. What d'you say?

-Akay-

Depends on the context, I think. "my mum" or "Ron's dad" should be lowercased, but addressing people like that as a name - "Hey, Mum" should be capitalised.

[mudbloodproud]

Akay,

Yes, they are capitalized unless they are preceded by a possessive. By that I mean, my, his, hers, your, Ron's, etc.

Also, it is always Mum never Mom unless the character is from the USA as in one of my stories.

[A.H.]

a) Wandmaker

b) wand maker

c) Wand Maker

d) other variation

Which? Thank you. :)

[Inverarity]

"Wand" is not a capitalized Potterword.

I can't remember if it was "wand-maker" or "wandmaker" in the books, but either one would be linguistically appropriate; wizards would probably treat it as a common compound noun, hence, "wandmaker."

[OliveOil_Med]

I have a question that has been driving me made lately. Is it spelled 'wizarding' or 'Wizarding'? I have seen it used both ways, so which is it?

Also, does he-who-must-not-be-named need to be capitalized?

[luinrina]

Molly, I just checked PS: He Who Must Not Be Named. "You-Know-Who" is hyphenated and capitalised. And in the British editions, it's also "wizarding", not capitalised.

Ari, GoF offers "wand-maker" in the chapter The Weighing of the Wands.

Hope that helped.

[Equinox Chick]

Ari, GoF offers "wand-maker" in the chapter The Weighing of the Wands.

However, chapter twenty-four of DH is called THE WANDMAKER and Ollivander is referred to as the wandmaker.

Carole
xxx

[padfoot_returns]

A l l r i g h t or A l r i g h t?

So. I always thought "alright" was okay to use but then I was looking at the PI tips and they told me when in doubt, check dictionary.com. So I did. And it said there that although using "alright" is becoming more widely accepted in writing, it is not grammatically correct. This what they said on the matter:

Which is correct - alright or all right?

It is not all right to use alright in place of all right in standard American English, even though there are similar contractions like "already," "almost," and "altogether." However, alright is coming into acceptance in British English. Alright as an adverb meaning 'just, exactly' is considered obsolete. The one-word spelling alright appeared about 75 years after all right itself had reappeared after disappearing for 400 years. Alright is less frequently used than all right but is found in journalistic and business writing. All right is used to express acquiescence or assent and also in predicative use as 'satisfactory, acceptable', and as an adjective phrase (often hyphenated) to indicate approval.

So I stopped using it and even changed every "alright" I saw into "all right" when beta-ing. But I see it so much around the boards and in the stories I read that I'm starting to doubt whether or not it's okay to use. Help?

xxRiham

EDIT: Thank you for the super fast reply, Terri! <3 And oooh, yes. Very insightful post. Thanks Akay! :D

[mudbloodproud]

When it comes to seeing a story with alright in it, I always request it be changed to all right. Alright isn't in the dictionary I bought upon becoming a mod so, I don't accept it.

I also request authors to change ok to okay. Though again, OK does appear in the books.

When in doubt, always use all right and okay. Better safe than sorry.

[Padfoot Patronus]

Riham - Check post 42 in this thread (http://fanfiction.mugglenet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29978). It's got some really good insight into this topic.

[A.H.]

Omniscient and head hopping, two of my least favorite things in the world.

I started to make a thread on this in GFD but realized it's a small question I have and probably better suited for here, and now that I'm here I feel like it's too broad a subject and probably should have it's own thread for discussion, but I'd really like insight into my one problem, and basically, if I'm not asking in the right spot, well, blame my indecisiveness. >.<

So, I started a story with omniscient. The first 800/900 words were more prominently from Sirius' PoV, but also dipping into others', and now that I've got the ball rolling on the story I've basically just got it from Sirius' PoV only. Is this in any way, shape, or form acceptable? I've read a lot of good books that successfully do this, staying prominently in one character's PoV but occasionally going to another, but I can just never use this PoV right and will most likely end up with that confusing head hopping syndrome, and want to stay with Sirius now. Do I need to edit the first part? Or is one passage of 800/900 words all right to leave?

>.<

Edit: Ha ha, wow, and I considered going there but since this wasn't rejected, figured this was the place to look. That's sort of weird. lol. -hugs fate and Akay- Thank you for both responding and pointing me there.

[Padfoot Patronus]

This is a very personal opinion :) . I'm thinking it'd be better if you edited it. Since you said, 'basically just got it from Sirius' PoV only' I'm thinking something from another POV would at least attract my attention unnecessarily to the narrative, in other words meaning, it'll break the flow. Unless it is what you mainly use throughout. I love Lord of the Rings but even in those books, I have to snap back when the focus changes from one character to another, because sometimes I'm so engrossed in one of them, that a sudden shift will make me raise my brow.

But sometimes that I have inadvertently written in this same style, it was because I didn't actually realise it and it was basically my incompetancy -cringes- You, on the other hand, know that you have actually brought in another person's POV, so maybe if you have written it in a good enough way that will not confuse your reader, then go ahead with it. See post 91 (http://fanfiction.mugglenet.com/forum/showthread.php?p=356531#post356531)on this, interesting suggestion on how to carry this style.

Is it a one-shot? I'd prefer to read something consistently with Sirius' POV then. If it is chaptered, there is chance that you may have to introduce a different character's thoughts even later on, and so it can work.

Actually, it can work both ways. It'd be good to have it read by a beta so that you won't be in doubt anymore as to whether (if you decide to leave the piece unedited) it is pulled off sufficiently. Otherwise, it is only 800/900 words ;)

-Akay-

[Equinox Chick]

When it comes to seeing a story with alright in it, I always request it be changed to all right. Alright isn't in the dictionary I bought upon becoming a mod so, I don't accept it.

My dictionary - a rather weighty tome - ( Chambers English Dictionary) has this to say about 'alright'

alright - An alternative, less acceptable, spelling of all right.

So it is less acceptable, however it has made the Chambers dictionary here in Ye Olde Britain - so does that make it valid?

On the subject of 'gotten' (Pet Peeve alert), it only has a side-entry under get and is described as a US word. There is an obselete noun 'gotten' which refers to offspring (all those bibilcal begats spring to mind.)

*closes dictionary and hurries to get a life*

[Sainyn Swiftfoot]

Has Imperius every been used as a verb in the books? If so, how? He Imperius'ed her? He Imperio'd her? :o

[Inverarity]

Has Imperius every been used as a verb in the books? If so, how? He Imperius'ed her? He Imperio'd her? :o

I'm pretty sure that Imperius, Crucio, and Avada Kedavra/AK being used as verbs is entirely a fanon invention. That said, it does seem like an informal coinage that wizards might use.

Personally, I'd go with Imperiused and Crucioed, which sound most natural in English. "Imperioed" sounds like a butchered hash of Latin/English inconsistent with how Latin verbs are usually Anglicized. I've seen "Cruciated" occasionally, but that sounds like an overly formal variant. And I think only younger (possibly Muggle-born) wizards would really say "Avada Kedavraed," much less "AKed." (And older wizards probably wince when they hear any of these usages.)

[Sapphire at Dawn]

I'm pretty sure that Imperiused has been used by Leanne, Katie Bells friend in HBP. I don't think that the Cruciatus or Avada Kadavra has, though.

Sarah x

[OliveOil_Med]

Don't forget, though, Voldemort attempted to use Avada Kadavra on Harry in DH, even though he didn't succeed. He also used it on the Muggle Studies teacher in the very first chapter of DH.

[Tim the Enchanter]

Don't forget, though, Voldemort attempted to use Avada Kadavra on Harry in DH, even though he didn't succeed. He also used it on the Muggle Studies teacher in the very first chapter of DH.

But that's still using Avada Kedavra as a noun, not a verb.

~~~~

"Cruciate" is canon, from the part in DH when Amycus Carrow discovered his unconscious sister, and threatened to torture all the Ravenclaws to find out who was responsible. (p. 476 Brit)

I believe that the Imperius curse has been used as "Imperiused", but I can't find it in any of the books right now.

However, I am pretty certain that Avada Kedavra has never been used as a verb in canon.

And I think only younger (possibly Muggle-born) wizards would really say "Avada Kedavraed," much less "AKed."

Ha ha! I think of something entirely different when I see "AKed". When I first stumbled upon the term ("Snape AK'ed Dumbledore"), the image of Snape gunning down the Headmaster with a Kalashnikov instantly formed in my head.

Tim the Enchanter

[OliveOil_Med]

I think a more correct verb tense would be, "He used the Impervious Curse", and so applied with all the other curses. This is just my opinion, though. What does everyone else think?

[Equinox Chick]

Imperiused is definitely in the books. As Sarah said, Leanne says it about Katie Bell just after the necklace incident.

"She looked all funny when she said it ... oh no, oh no, I bet she'd been Imperiused, and I didn't realise." HBP Silver and Opals page 236 UK Hardback edition

Carole

[Inverarity]

I think a more correct verb tense would be, "He used the Impervious Curse", and so applied with all the other curses. This is just my opinion, though. What does everyone else think?

I think the Impervious Curse sounds like something that makes you.... really dense?

Seriously, I had forgotten Leanne's line in HBP. (I'd forgotten Leanne, actually.) But yes, I think formal usage would be, "He used the ______ Curse," and turning the names of the curses themselves into verbs would be more of a younger generation thing.