Fanfic Pet Peeves

[Kunoichi]

or jack walking back to the gate with his severed artery or carrying sam or daniel over his shoulder with a broken collar bone

This! Plus miraculous recovers the day after major surgery (although the show was guilty of doing this too)!

[Goose]

Sorry, Goose, gonna have to disagree. While you might yell, "Colonel! Wait up!", you would never yell, "The Colonel! Wait up!" This is how I would determine if it's being used as his name or not.

I use this site to answer most (90+%) of my questions about grammar. I have found it to be an invaluable source. Click here for capitalization rules.

I'm not suggesting that you can use 'The Colonel' every time instead of 'Colonel', so obviously the example you just gave wouldn't work. However, in your first example, 'Sam rolled her eyes at the colonel', you can replace 'the colonel' with Jack, and it'd still make sense. Therefore, I'm saying that in that case, you would capitalise 'the Colonel'. Just because you put a 'the' in front of Colonel doesn't mean that it shouldn't be capitalised. Sometimes, I'd argue, it should, sometimes (like in the exampe you gave), it shouldn't.

[Seaboe Muffinchucker]

My biggest pet peeve is when people can't get basic science right...

I know more about frostbite and the treatment of it than a lot of people. I know that, and try to give people the benefit of the doubt. However, when the piece of info is something easily found on the internet, it really bugs me when people get it wrong. I read what would have been a great piece, except that it had Jack and Daniel trapped in a crevase; they weren't going to get out any time soon and Daniel's hands were frost bitten. The author had Jack use a chemical heat pouch to thaw them, even though Daniel had lost his gloves.

One of the first rules of frostbite treatment (easily found on the internet--dead easy) is that you NEVER thaw the frozen bits if there's a chance they will re-freeze. It does much less damage to leave them frozen. You'd never use a chemical heat pouch to thaw them either, but I can forgive that, as it takes more digging to find out something like that.

And if you do get frostbite, you're not going to be fine as soon as the extremity thaws. There's edema and nerve damage and all sorts of nasty stuff. Again, I can forgive people getting some of this wrong, as it's not as easy to find information on frostbite treatment and consequences as it is prevention.

Sorry--clearly this is more than a pet peeve, it's a soapbox. I'll get down, now.

Seaboe

ETA: I don't know if it's irony or not, but the reason I know all this is because I had to research frostbite for a story I was writing. So I know how easy/hard it is to find the information for writing purposes.

[Goose]

I know more about frostbite and the treatment of it than a lot of people. I know that, and try to give people the benefit of the doubt. However, when the piece of info is something easily found on the internet, it really bugs me when people get it wrong. I read what would have been a great piece, except that it had Jack and Daniel trapped in a crevase; they weren't going to get out any time soon and Daniel's hands were frost bitten. The author had Jack use a chemical heat pouch to thaw them, even though Daniel had lost his gloves.

One of the first rules of frostbite treatment (easily found on the internet--dead easy) is that you NEVER thaw the frozen bits if there's a chance they will re-freeze. It does much less damage to leave them frozen. You'd never use a chemical heat pouch to thaw them either, but I can forgive that, as it takes more digging to find out something like that.

And if you do get frostbite, you're not going to be fine as soon as the extremity thaws. There's edema and nerve damage and all sorts of nasty stuff. Again, I can forgive people getting some of this wrong, as it's not as easy to find information on frostbite treatment and consequences as it is prevention.

Sorry--clearly this is more than a pet peeve, it's a soapbox. I'll get down, now.

Seaboe

Well, I for one agree with you. If you're going to include some kind of science or medicine in your story, it'd be wise to do at least some basic research in the subject before writing the story.

[Kunoichi]

Agreed. It's pretty easy these days to google for basic science/medical information.

[Feast of the Muse]

Out of curiosity, was there something about the bullet that was no bueno? I have not yet seen this episode, only read the wikia summary. It says Kate goes unconscious more that once. Was it a poison bullet, or drugged somehow? That would be the only reason I would dig a bullet out in the field.

[SF_and_Coffee]

From what my books say, titles (Colonel, etc) should not be capitalized unless attached to a name or used in place of one.

how i remember when to capitalize titles...if you can swap out the name for the title, then capitalize it, if not then you don't have to.

Sam rolled her eyes at the colonel. (basically, if there's a 'the' in front, you don't capitalize it)
Colonel O'Neill led his team through the gate. (it's part of his official title...if it has a name attached, capitalize it
Hey, Colonel, we're gonna head down for lunch. (you can swap out Jack for Colonel, so you capitalize it)

But you can swap 'the Colonel' for Jack: 'Sam rolled her eyes at Jack'. I'd capitalise the Colonel in that case, myself. In fact, I'd say that any time that it refers to a specific person, I'd capitalise it. The only case in which I wouldn't capitalise the above example was if Sam rolled her eyes at a random colonel, but I would if it referred to Jack the Colonel.

Sorry, Goose, gonna have to disagree. While you might yell, "Colonel! Wait up!", you would never yell, "The Colonel! Wait up!" This is how I would determine if it's being used as his name or not.

I use this site to answer most (90+%) of my questions about grammar. I have found it to be an invaluable source. Click here for capitalization rules.

I'm not suggesting that you can use 'The Colonel' every time instead of 'Colonel', so obviously the example you just gave wouldn't work. However, in your first example, 'Sam rolled her eyes at the colonel', you can replace 'the colonel' with Jack, and it'd still make sense. Therefore, I'm saying that in that case, you would capitalise 'the Colonel'. Just because you put a 'the' in front of Colonel doesn't mean that it shouldn't be capitalised. Sometimes, I'd argue, it should, sometimes (like in the exampe you gave), it shouldn't.

No. Simply, putting the article "the" in front of a word turns the word into a common noun rather than a proper noun. Common nouns are not capitalized in standard English.

Note the portions of the above quoted posts that I have rendered in red. The rule covering it is in Skydiver's second link to Grammarbook. A good way to remember it, though, simply involves remembering the word "the".

Think of "the colonel" as equivalent to "the man" or "the woman". Now, you wouldn't say "Sam rolled her eyes at the Man," would you? In this context, colonel = man. (If it were a female colonel, obviously colonel = woman; either way, you don't capitalize them.) In other words, man, woman and colonel are common nouns in this context, and common nouns aren't capitalized.

So Skydiver is correct. When you use "Colonel" (or "General" or whatever) in place of a name, without "the", it is capitalized, because it is being used as a proper noun, standing in for the name of the actual person. Proper nouns are capitalized. HOWEVER, when you use "the" before the title, then the title is no longer functioning as a proper noun but as a common noun.

A good way to remember the "the" rule with regard to capitalization in this context:

You would never write "the" in front of a person's given name.

Sam looked up and saw the Jack standing in the doorway.

is obviously wrong.

Sam looked up and saw Jack standing in the doorway.

is correct. So is

Sam looked up and saw Colonel O'Neill standing in the doorway.

However, once you have "the" in there, you cannot follow it with a name, or a name-equivalent, which means you cannot capitalize. Thus the correct way would be to say

Sam looked up and saw the colonel standing in the doorway.

In that sentence, "colonel" is not functioning as a name, and therefore you don't capitalize it. But if Sam looks up and sees him, and then addresses him by his title, THEN the title is functioning as a given name, so it has no "the", and therefore it IS capitalized.

"Good morning, Colonel," said Sam.

In other words, capitalize it if it is used as a form of direct address to a person. But then Jack goes on to mention his upcoming meeting:

"We'll see how good it is once we get that MALP telemetry analyzed. I have a meeting with the general in ten minutes."

He isn't addressing Hammond (or any other general); he is merely referring to him. Therefore, "general" is a common, rather than proper, noun in this context and is not capitalized. How do we know? Well, he used "the" in front of it, and we know that "the" is not used in front of a person's given name or something standing in for that name.

Does that help any?

[mathpiglet]

Well explained.

Does it work for nonstandard nouns as well. General Hammond calls some folks 'son'. Would that be capitized?

"It's okay, Son. We all make mistakes."

or "It's okay, son. We all make mistakes."

[SF_and_Coffee]

Well explained.

Does it work for nonstandard nouns as well. General Hammond calls some folks 'son'. Would that be capitized?

"It's okay, Son. We all make mistakes."

or "It's okay, son. We all make mistakes."

The word "son" is not a title; it is always a common noun, and therefore should never be capitalized unless it begins a sentence.

[mathpiglet]

Thanks.

BTW, isn't it amazing how this thread keeps veering back to punctuation and language usage?

[WraithRichard]

Well explained.

Does it work for nonstandard nouns as well. General Hammond calls some folks 'son'. Would that be capitized?

"It's okay, Son. We all make mistakes."

or "It's okay, son. We all make mistakes."

Since it's used in place of a proper name, it should be capitalized.

[SF_and_Coffee]

Since it's used in place of a proper name, it should be capitalized.

If "son" were a title, you would be correct, but I know of no context in which "son" is a title.

[WraithRichard]

If "son" were a title, you would be correct, but I know of no context in which "son" is a title.

Isn't he using the word 'Son' instead of the person's name?

[SF_and_Coffee]

Isn't he using the word 'Son' instead of the person's name?

Yes, but that doesn't matter, because it isn't a title. Titles are unique in that they can be either proper or common nouns. A word like "son", however, is not a title and therefore is never a proper noun. Here's an analogous example:

Two young women are walking down the street, talking about their boyfriends. One looks at the other and says, "Well, girl, in my opinion, he's cheating on you."

Note that "girl" would not be capitalized in that sentence, despite the fact that it is being used by one person to address the other. Writing it as

"Well, Girl, in my opinion, he's cheating on you."

just looks wrong, doesn't it? (It should, because it is.)

[mathpiglet]

Yes, but that doesn't matter, because it isn't a title. Here's an analogous example:

Two young women are walking down the street, talking about their boyfriends. One looks at the other and says, "Well, girl, in my opinion, he's cheating on you."

Note that "girl" would not be capitalized in that sentence, despite the fact that it is being used by one person to address the other. Writing it as

"Well, Girl, in my opinion, he's cheating on you."

just looks wrong, doesn't it? (It should, because it is.)

I've struggled with this. I want to capitalize it since it is used as a name, but I've never been sure. It looks sort of right both ways.