Tools for writing: Economist Style Guide online
I’m editing a client’s sales proposal today. It’s very lengthy and technical and they’ve fallen into all the usual pitfalls:
- Multi word noun strings (”back end data centre server environment”)
- Overuse of the passive voice
- Capitalising Random words
- Verbosity
- Unnecessary formality
For more on this subject. Check out my previous articles: Geeks: How to write for a non-technical audience and Surprise and delight: ten tips for writers.
One interesting problem came up. They said “We recommend that Company Name proceed to the next stage.” Or something like that (changed to protect my client’s identity). But is a company singular or plural?
I was pretty sure it is singular but I wanted to be absolutely sure. So I checked the Economist Style Guide online edition. Sure enough:
A government, a party, a company (whether Tesco or Marks and Spencer) and a partnership (Skidmore, Owings & Merrill) are all it and take a singular verb.
I have a printed copy (see my review) but the online version is so much easier to use because it is searchable. So, I recommend it to every writer. Very useful.
Technorati Tags: Economist, Style Guide, how to, write, editing
Michael Kenward wrote:
The singular plural thing is not really “right or wrong”. It is a matter of style. And style is not about grammar, but about being consistent.
You can, if you must, pluralise a company, but you must do so every time you use the label. That is what The Economist’s style guide is for, although, as with everything from the magazine (sic) they do try to tell the world how it should think.
Then again, I have always considered companies to be singular entities.
Posted on 02-Jan-07 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
Owen Lystrup wrote:
I wish AP would make a searchable online style guide.
Posted on 02-Jan-07 at 1:54 pm | Permalink
Janet Swisher wrote:
Thanks for the link to Economist style guide!
Regarding the sentence that sent you there, I don’t see how the question of number affects it. The verb “proceed” in the subjunctive mood, and therefore should not be “proceeds”, even if the subject is singular.
See
“The present subjunctive … occurs in ‘that’ clauses used to state commands or to express intentions or necessity.”
Posted on 03-Jan-07 at 12:00 am | Permalink
Sara Freitas-Maltave wrote:
This is an interesting question.
I am not sure if I understand your issue with singular/plural here. In American English, collective nouns (company, family, etc.) take the singular, while in British English, as far as I know, they *can* also take the plural (as Michael Kenward commented it is a matter of style). So, according to the Economist Style Guide, which recommends the singular for certain collective nouns, would you have changed the verb to “…that the company proceedS…”?
If so, I disagree. The case in point is a subjunctive, not a matter of singular/plural for a collective noun: “We recommend that Company Name proceed…” It would thus remain the same regardless of whether the company (collective noun) takes the singular or plural. For instance, “It was raining, so I insisted he take an umbrella”, not “..he takes an umbrella”.
Gramatically yours,
Sara Freitas-Maltaverne
Posted on 03-Jan-07 at 7:00 am | Permalink
Michael Kenward wrote:
As Sara says, “they” can also be singular in English English. (Not sure about the Scots.) ) Indeed, it is a construction I use when trying to “desex” writing.
You don’t need to write “He/she ran over the cat.” “They ran over the cat,” is just as valid, even when there is only one driver.
Posted on 03-Jan-07 at 2:28 pm | Permalink
Owen Lystrup wrote:
Michael’s right about the plural/singular thing being style.
A good example is not companies but bands. True that a name/band is a single entity, but many publications use a plural pronoun when referring to them because it sounds weird otherwise.
Imagine this sentence: “I like the Beatles. It’s great!” (Of course, we’ve deleted ‘a great band,’ but it can be implied.)
Yuck.
Therefore most writers/journalists–like at Rolling Stone for instance–would use the plural form.
I don’t use English English because I’m American, but I tend prefer using one form of pronoun and sticking with it. He/she bothers me and “they” is just wrong according to most American English writers and editors.
Posted on 03-Jan-07 at 11:02 pm | Permalink
Bad Language / Is a company singular or plural? Part 2 wrote:
[...] My recent post about the Economist Style Guide included a passing comment about whether companies were singular or plural. It generated a surprising number of comments and a some grammarphile controversy. [...]
Posted on 16-Jan-07 at 9:35 am | Permalink
Tev wrote:
Whether or not “They ran over the cat” is valid or not, it doesn’t sound right in formal writing. It’s ok to use in everyday speech, but not in a report. Use he or she, and include a disclaimer if you’re worried about sounding sexist.
Posted on 16-Jan-07 at 11:56 pm | Permalink
Michael Kenward wrote:
Sorry, Tev, but you are wrong grammatically. Unless, as someone else has pointed out, you are American.
Lots of things that don’t “sound right” are perfectly correct, just as some things that do sound right can be wrong. For example, perfectionists hate splitting infinitives, but they sound just fine to most people.
Singular uses of they are just fine in the right circumstances. It certainly reads better than the usual passive writing of formal reports.
Posted on 17-Jan-07 at 10:51 am | Permalink