Sic and Tired.

[tablesaw]

Dear Television without Pity,

While I often enjoy the clever writing you employ while recapping various television shows, you are no longer allowed to use the word sic. I understand that not all of your writers use it, but too many of them do.

Now, as a site that spends a lot of time transcribing spoken dialogue, one might think that sic would be a useful tool. There could conceivably be times when what was said on air might not be what one would expect, and a sic could then be used to indicate, "Yes, that's actually what he said, even though you might be confused or expect it to be something else." However, because television producers don't generally like confusing their audience, in practice, this occurs extremely rarely.

And in practice, you use sic as a sledgehammer of snobbery to enforce a pedantic prescriptivism that has no place in the contexts you deal with. The phrases and usages for which you use sic are often perfectly acceptable even in edited and formal prose (like using "they" as a singular pronoun). Moreover, you're not even dealing with an edited or formal environment; you're dealing with dialogue which was either created on the spot and under pressure (in the case of a reality show) or was designed to duplicate that kind of speech.

The implication in the way you use sic is that someone (whether a writer or a reality-show contestant) doesn't know as much about language as they should. In fact, it is you who should learn more about language before you start making accusations about what is wrong.

Sincerely,
Tablesaw

FriNYTX: 12:30.

Comments

[cramerica.livejournal.com]

Sic 'em!

[jeffurrynpl.livejournal.com]

I have to admit, I've actually used some of TWoP's grammar comments to help me when grading lab reports, such as their comments like "a group of people does not have one collective arm."

Diagramming sentences had gone out of style right before I went to school and nothing replaced it.

[acroarcs.livejournal.com]

It didn't go away completely, as I spent a while diagramming sentences in eighth grade (1995-96). I think it was something my particular teacher thought was important, though, and not a general movement back to diagramming.

[nothings.livejournal.com]

I think "The implication in the way you use sic is that someone (whether a writer or a reality-show contestant) doesn't know as much about language as they should" is not an accurate characterization. It could, for instance, be the case that they think the text as noted is incorrect but that the writer did it intentionally, putting it in the mouth of the character.

However, I agree with your overall complaint, and it does sound like it gets used not as "this incorrect usage is not a transcription error" but rather "I would never put it this way".

[tablesaw]

That's what I was getting at in the second paragraph. It could, but it doesn't. And deliberate but nonstandard choices are usually left unmarked and then elaborated on outside of the quotation.

Here's a representative example of TWoP usage, the one that reminded me to write this rant:

Van Statten leads the Doctor to the cage, and taps in codes to let them in: "We've tried everything. The creature has shielded itself, but there's [sic] definite signs of life inside."

First, Language Log has commented on how the construction is merely informal, not incorrect. But more importantly, the reader has no barrier to understanding what's been transcribed. In fact, using sic breaks up the flow of the sentence more than the phrase it indicates.