The Editorial "We"
I was reading penknife's testament to the vocative comma and was moved to contemplate the poor vocative comma and its abused comrades. My mother worked (and continues to work) as a copyeditor; it is my theory that this constant exposure to the rules of the English language somehow affected my young intellect, making me vulnerable to the allure of polysyllabic words. Rotisserie! Expurgation! Anathema! Simultaneously, however, this upbringing left me with a number of weaknesses. Chief among these is a strident reaction to poor grammar, whether alone or paired with poor spelling. You will understand then, dear reader, the trepidation with which I approached the masses of text lurking deep within the bowels of the Internet. The misplacement of an apostrophe sends a shudder down my spine. The inversion of "i" and "e" makes me tremble. Once, upon exposure to four consecutive hours of world chat in World of Warcraft, I fainted dead away; fortunately, I awoke lying upon an open copy of the Chicago Manual of Style and was able to revive myself through some brisk indexing. It is wholly true that the English language is constantly evolving, as all languages must do. The constant importation and synthesis of new words and styles elevates our efforts at communication to new and exciting levels. (I particularly enjoy Tycho Brahe's newly minted lexiconnoiseur. Should you follow the most recent link, please scroll down.) And yet, we shall never replace the humble comma and its valiant comrades. Bravo, sirs! I salute you! May your kindly advice support us always!