# "Misquoting" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 24, 2006, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395 "2006-01-24T15:31:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/81 "2006-01-26T03:04:47Z")
> [@What Exit?](#): > > What happens if you use \*\*ieSpell 2.1.1.325 \*\* and accidentally correct a mistake in the quote? Don’t know the software, but I guess that won’t just cover “mistakes”, but also British English into American English. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/82 "2006-01-26T03:35:48Z")
> [@roger thornhill](#): > > Mr Haven, it may be worth adding as an exemption to the no-changing-quotation rule the tidying up of spelling and grammar. If the quote retains the typos, then not only does this sometimes make it look as if you’re rubbing the original quotee’s face in it, but it tends to function as an unwanted distraction and as a temptation to our grammar police and comedians, who will hijack the thread by focusing on the errors. Just a thought, since I do it all the time. Nice bloke, aren’t I? You really shouldn’t, you know. Not without indicating it. We’re all used to seeing typoes anyway, as there’s no way to fix them in our actual posts. Screwing around with that sort of thing in a quote is considered a no-no in most other circumstances. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/83 "2006-01-26T04:43:08Z")
> [@C K Dexter Haven](#): > > - To add explanatory material, identified by [square] brackets; sometimes this includes short comment [sic] Before one of you barracks lawyers decides to take this as an invitation to wedge some nasty little insults into a quotation, I will point out that words such as “idiotic” and “shameful” and other adjectives that either modify the tenor of the quotation or interject an editorial comment into the quotation remain forbidden. For example (invented for the purposes of instruction) the following quotation > [@PosterA](#): > > Mubarak expressed the thought that this would be good for his government in seeking U.S. aid. may be modified in the following ways > [@PosterA](#): > > Mubarek [President of Egypt] expressed the thought that this would be good for his government in seeking U.S. aid. > [@PosterA](#): > > Mubarek [in a press conference] expressed the thought that this would be good for his government in seeking U.S. aid. The same quote would bring a warning if modified to say > [@PosterA](#): > > Mubarek [in his typical racist anti-semitism] expressed the thought that this would be good for his government in seeking U.S. aid. > [@PosterA](#): > > Mubarek [according to the typical naïveté of PosterA] expressed the thought that this would be good for his government in seeking U.S. aid. If you need to comment on either the object of **PosterA** ’s quotation or the mental attributes of **PosterA** , do it outside the quote tags. ---
**Author:** ![roger\_thornhill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@roger\_thornhill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/roger_thornhill)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 7:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/84 "2006-01-26T07:55:50Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > You really shouldn’t, you know. Not without indicating it. We’re all used to seeing typoes anyway, as there’s no way to fix them in our actual posts. Screwing around with that sort of thing in a quote is considered a no-no in most other circumstances. Okay, okay, and I’m not the sort of guy who screws around anyway. However, I might come like a thief in the night from time to time to change, say, ‘typoes’ to ‘typos’, just to keep you on your mettle. ---
**Author:** ![Go\_You\_Big\_Red\_Fire\_Engine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/eada6e/32.png) [@Go\_You\_Big\_Red\_Fire\_Engine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Go_You_Big_Red_Fire_Engine)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 9:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/85 "2006-01-26T09:44:55Z")
> [@roger thornhill](#): > > You a lawyer? No. But I’m not some pedantic asshole who feels it’s appropriate to change someone’s quote etiher. What is a quote if not an exact copy of someone else’s words? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/86 "2006-01-26T13:12:39Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > You really shouldn’t, you know. Not without indicating it. We’re all used to seeing typoes anyway, as there’s no way to fix them in our actual posts. Screwing around with that sort of thing in a quote is considered a no-no in most other circumstances. Are you sure? I thought it was SOP for journalists to remove the repetitions, the “ums,” and other verbal garbage from quotes before reporting them. I would think that correcting a misspelling would fall in the same category. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/87 "2006-01-26T13:40:05Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Are you sure? I thought it was SOP for journalists to remove the repetitions, the “ums,” and other verbal garbage from quotes before reporting them. I would think that correcting a misspelling would fall in the same category. > > Daniel Like I said, I’m not that familiar with journalistic quote rules. Actually, when reporting speech from interviews, it’s common that they are changed far more than that - I’m not sure of the extent of what’s considered ethical, but [Language Log](http://www.languagelog.com/) has had several entries pertaining to quotes that were wildly different in different sources. That stems from a basic fact about spontaneous speech - it’s messy. If speech is transcribed accurately, it can be hard to follow a conversation because of all the choppiness, false starts, self-corrections, and so forth. To turn a spoken quote into something that is printable and doesn’t look ridiculous requires a certain amount of fixing. Since we are using the written word, a medium that inherently allows people to correct themselves transparently and compose sentences that are comprehensible without fixing (whether or not certain posters take advantage of those capabilities) the standards of journalistic quoting of speech don’t really apply. That’s why what you describe is _not_ permitted in quoting written material - something I would expect you to have picked up in school (though I suppose basic composition is not taught to many people). That’s why practices like bracketing letters just to change their case or inserting _[sic]_ after grammatical errors exist, after all. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/88 "2006-01-26T13:43:31Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Are you sure? I thought it was SOP for journalists to remove the repetitions, the “ums,” and other verbal garbage from quotes before reporting them. I would think that correcting a misspelling would fall in the same category. > > Daniel We need to lure the mods/admins back for one more clarification. I lean towards silent corrections are okay, but I fully understand Excalibre’s point. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/89 "2006-01-26T17:40:07Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > Since we are using the written word, a medium that inherently allows people to correct themselves transparently and compose sentences that are comprehensible without fixing (whether or not certain posters take advantage of those capabilities) the standards of journalistic quoting of speech don’t really apply. I don’t know about that. I take your point about the difference between written and spoken language, but it seems to me that the message board format falls somewhere in between. True, it’s a written medium. But, at the same time it has much of the spontaneity and fluidity of the spoken word–the degree of which varies considerably from poster to poster. Some post here almost exactly the way they’d speak, replete with "um"s and "errr"s. Others, like you and I, tend to post with a more formal writing style, depending on the intent of the post. So, what should the editorial rules be? Damn if _I_ know. On the one hand, there’s my own style in this regard, which tends to follow the stricter rules of editorial quoting of written material, as you outline. On the other hand, I don’t particularly have an issue with minor spelling corrections where the error is an obvious typo, such as “teh” for “the” or “atfer” for “after”. If the error appears to be an endemic misspelling, I’d favor the use of [sic] to indicate it. But again, this kind of thing is anything but clear cut. If I were pressed to decide right now, I’d probably favor your position, which largely mirrors my own behavior in quoting material here. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/90 "2006-01-26T18:15:23Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > I don’t know about that. I take your point about the difference between written and spoken language, but it seems to me that the message board format falls somewhere in between. True, it’s a written medium. But, at the same time it has much of the spontaneity and fluidity of the spoken word–the degree of which varies considerably from poster to poster. Some post here almost exactly the way they’d speak, replete with "um"s and "errr"s. You’re missing the point. Directly transcribed speech - if it’s transcribed accurately - is usually marginally comprehensible at best, and even in the best of circumstances accurately transcribing someone’s spontaneous speech tends to make them look like an idiot (for a similar situation, cf. “eye dialect” writing, spelling words phonologically to signal the speaker’s lack of education. _It wuzn’t enuff_ is a perfectly standard pronunciation, but spelling it that way signals that the speaker is speaking a nonstandard dialect.) We’re not in that situation here. It’s not a matter of formal versus informal register, it’s an issue of pure comprehensibility. When someone writes incomprehensibly (and there are a few to be sure) altering the contents of quote boxes seems inappropriate to me; if you feel the need to, for instance, translate **alaricthegoth** ’s latest magnum opus, you should do it outside of a quote box. > [@](#): > > Others, like you and I, “Like you and me”. But why should I correct that in a quote box? I don’t want people screwing around with my writing to bring it inline with prescriptive standards, I don’t want people deciding to change my spellings to their dialects, and misspellings rarely impact readability. Altering spoken quotes is not done by journalists to make everyone come across like Basil Rathbone - it’s to turn speech into something that can be understood when written. That justification for changing quoted material doesn’t exist here; seems presumptuous to me to take it upon oneself to decide what someone else _meant_ to say, when (as you indicate above) many people wish to come across in a deliberately casual style. > [@](#): > > On the other hand, I don’t particularly have an issue with minor spelling corrections where the error is an obvious typo, such as “teh” for “the” or “atfer” for “after”. If the error appears to be an endemic misspelling, I’d favor the use of [sic] to indicate it. But again, this kind of thing is anything but clear cut. If I were pressed to decide right now, I’d probably favor your position, which largely mirrors my own behavior in quoting material here. I just don’t see what this solves - if you can read it, probably everyone else can too. It’s not as annoying as people who pop up to say, “Oops! I meant ‘the’, not ‘teh’, in my previous post!” But it’s equally unnecessary. We’re quite accustomed to seeing misspellings and typos in posts, since editing is impossible. Do they only become troublesome when italicized in a quote box? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/91 "2006-01-26T18:15:51Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Are you sure? I thought it was SOP for journalists to remove the repetitions, the “ums,” and other verbal garbage from quotes before reporting them. I would think that correcting a misspelling would fall in the same category. > > Daniel Two different things. Removing nonsense syllables from spoken speech in transcription (um, err) is not the same thing as altering a written document. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/92 "2006-01-26T18:28:32Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > I just don’t see what this solves - if you can read it, probably everyone else can too. It’s not as annoying as people who pop up to say, “Oops! I meant ‘the’, not ‘teh’, in my previous post!” But it’s equally unnecessary. We’re quite accustomed to seeing misspellings and typos in posts, since editing is impossible. Do they only become troublesome when italicized in a quote box? Not at all. Nor did I miss your point; quite the contrary. I suppose I wasn’t clear enough, but the point I was addressing was not so much the issue of clarity, but rather what the _rule_ should be regarding quote editing. I absolutely agree with you that most of the time, it is perfectly clear what is meant for a given typo–as I said, for myself, I rarely edit a spelling error in a quoted post for just the reasons you outline. I would just like some clarification on what the _rule_ is regarding editing, for those who _are_ inclined to make such corrections when posting. And thanks for the grammar correction–I always make that mistake. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/93 "2006-01-26T18:35:30Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Not at all. Nor did I miss your point; quite the contrary. I suppose I wasn’t clear enough, but the point I was addressing was not so much the issue of clarity, but rather what the _rule_ should be regarding quote editing. I absolutely agree with you that most of the time, it is perfectly clear what is meant for a given typo–as I said, for myself, I rarely edit a spelling error in a quoted post for just the reasons you outline. I would just like some clarification on what the _rule_ is regarding editing, for those who _are_ inclined to make such corrections when posting. > > And thanks for the grammar correction–I always make that mistake. 🙂 I think the thing is that generally, the rule with quoting (elsewhere in the world) is to screw around with what someone says only when necessary. Journalists couldn’t simply transcribe off-the-cuff remarks and end up with something usable, so they massage it into something that resembles casual _writing_ rather than speech. In every other context, you don’t get to change quoted material at all. I guess I don’t see any pressing reason to make this place any different. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/94 "2006-01-26T18:41:28Z")
Ok, let me put it another way: Do you you think those who _do_ make minor spelling corrections in quotes, which _do not_ change the sense of the quote in any way, ought to be chastized for it? Whether it’s necessary or not is immaterial–for the record I agree with your position; it’s how I handle quoting anyway–we’re just concerned with the rule here. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/95 "2006-01-26T18:43:48Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > Ok, let me put it another way: Do you you think those who _do_ make minor spelling corrections in quotes, which _do not_ change the sense of the quote in any way, ought to be chastized for it? Whether it’s necessary or not is immaterial–for the record I agree with your position; it’s how I handle quoting anyway–we’re just concerned with the rule here. Well, probably yes. I guess I don’t think you should take liberties with quoted text except when you have a compelling reason to do so. **roger thornhill** ’s desire to fix “typoes” to “typos” does not strike me as a compelling reason. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/96 "2006-01-26T19:02:18Z")
I suppose I could live with that, if the PTB wish to make that the rule. It seems unnecessarily restrictive, to me. As long as no malice is intended, I’d have little issue with someone correcting an obvious typo in a post of mine. Of course, that opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/97 "2006-01-26T19:25:20Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > I suppose I could live with that, if the PTB wish to make that the rule. It seems unnecessarily restrictive to me. As long as no malice is intended, I’d have little issue with someone correcting an obvious typo in a post of mine. Of course, that opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn’t it? In the interest of felicitous prose, I’ve removed a comma from the above quote. I don’t think it should be like a warning offense or anything. It just seems to me that we should err on the side of not encouraging liberties with quotes. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/98 "2006-01-26T19:31:19Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > I don’t think it should be like a warning offense or anything. It just seems to me that we should err on the side of not encouraging liberties with quotes. I’m fine with that. It’s a perfectly reasonable stance. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/99 "2006-01-26T19:53:07Z")
> [@Excalibre](#): > > In the interest of felicitous prose, I’ve removed a comma from the above quote. > > I don’t think it should be like a warning offense or anything. It just seems to me that we should err on the side of not encouraging liberties with quotes. Sounds very reasonable to me. I would hate to draw a warning for an incidental/accidental correction of teh to the. I would almost consider the [sic] more embarrassing, but then I am a poor speller. Jim ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2006, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395/100 "2006-01-26T20:05:40Z")
> [@Q.E.D.](#): > > I’m fine with that. It’s a perfectly reasonable stance[, assuming you’re a prostitute suffering from syphilis-induced dementia]. Oh, yeah? Up yours, buddy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/misquoting/341395.md?page=6)