Conventions.

[azurelunatic]

Asterisks are used to denote emphasis in a plaintext environment.

Parenthetical statements are denoted with (oh dear gods) *parentheses*!


Therefore, if I wish to *emphasize* a word or two, I do it like *this*, and if I wish to make an aside in a sentence (such as giving the reader more information when using commas would be confusing) I put it between parentheses.


So, dear community member, if you use asterisks to provide me with background information on something I probably should know *there are at least two people who do it in communities I participate in, and I hold rank in one of those communities* then I will think that either you are an idiot, or *if I already know that you are an intelligent person* I will think that you've been poorly educated.

Above sentence was an example of how *not* to use parentheses and asterisks. It should read as follows:

So, dear community member, if you use asterisks to provide me with background information on something I probably should know (there are at least two people who do it in communities I participate in, and I hold rank in one of those communities) then I will think that either you are an idiot, or (if I already know that you are an intelligent person) I will think that you've been poorly educated.

This has been a community service announcement from the Grammar Bitch, who at least makes an effort to correct herself when someone points out that she's wrong (and welcomes polite notices to that effect).

Comments

Re: Conventions

[wolfieboy.livejournal.com]

This convention (of asterisks denoting emphasis) is common enough to be featured in *both* Gnus (the emacs mail/news reader) and MS Outlook (although for me, that would hearsay). You're not likely to see two more diverse than that.

Re: Conventions

[azurelunatic]

I hadn't been aware of either.

I'm one who picks up style without being taught, when I'm exposed to a style.

Fascinating.

Re: Conventions

[wolfieboy.livejournal.com]

I used it before I knew about it. I was surprised when I first saw it in Gnus.

BTW, your final statement drives me to add a little bit to my userinfo...

[unblinkered.livejournal.com]

Not sure if this (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1861976127/qid=1074540883/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/202-7146224-6898215) book is out in the US, but I would heartily recommend it! After reading it, I was sorely tempted to photocopy relevant passages and send them to various journalists and authors.

[azurelunatic]

It does seem to be listed! It's not released yet, though. I've added it to my wish list.

No way -

[alphafenris.livejournal.com]

Wait, wait, wait. You actually know of people that claim to use English as their primary language that use asterisks to form parenthetical statments? That makes my mind go all bendy. (Sure, I have fun with spelling, word definitions, and "accents" when I type out wee missives . . . but making parenthetical statements with an asterisk is just plain wrong)

Re: No way -

[azurelunatic]

One of the offenders is in note_to_cat. One of them I do believe is from steps_and_such.

What I believe they're doing is mistaking footnotes* for parenthetical statements.

---

* Terry Pratchett uses footnotes to great effect. I was reading The Truth yesterday, and the footnotes added a lot to the experience. (I considered changing my journal's name to "Someone With the Social Graces of Duckweed" but decided against it.