For a few years, I taught writing and editing courses for businesses. Some workshops flew; others foundered on the simplest points.

            Pharmaceutical companies, in particular, often hired Asian immigrants. I’ve no doubt they were well qualified, highly trained, even brilliant. They had studied English. But they came from languages that didn’t use little things like prepositions. Or articles. Or even commas.

            “Why you need ‘the’ before noun?” someone might ask.

            Or perhaps, “Why sometimes ‘agree with,’ sometimes ‘agree to,’ sometimes ‘agree on’?”

            I offered examples. They would ask, “Where we find book that teach us these rules?”

            There isn’t one. Or more accurately, there are hundreds.

            I could refer them to authoritative texts like the Chicago Manual of Style. Or to Edward Johnson's Writers' Handbook, Theodore Bernstein’s The Careful Writer, or the Canadian Writer’s Handbook by William Messenger and Jan de Bruyn. Most publishers either have their own style guides, or use something like the Canadian Press Stylebook. And of course, there are classics, periodically updated, like Fowler’s Modern English Usage.

            But not one of them can provide rules for every situation.

            An editing colleague once admitted that he keeps an entire shelf of books about language – so he can always find one that supports his own opinion!

            As far as I know, no human has ever memorized all the pages about commas in the Chicago Manual of Style.

Read. Then read some more

            Learning to do anything fluently is not about rules but about familiarity.

            If I were teaching those students today, I would tell them to read. And not just to read, but to read aloud.

            Reading silently -- or worse, skimming for information -- won't let the language soak into the pores of your being. But reading aloud will. You have to say the words; you also hear yourself saying them.

            Better yet, read aloud to someone else. If they lose interest, you’re probably not interested yourself in what you’re reading. To read aloud, the words must make sense to you before they can make sense to anyone else. Those characters have to be more than mere names – they have feelings and personalities. An explanation has to be more than a welter of words; it has to mean something.

            Reading aloud is the only way to absorb the sonorities of the King James Bible. The wicked wit of Oscar Wilde or Lewis Carroll. The cool logic of Carl Sagan.

            Read Dylan Thomas to sponge up metaphors. Read Fred Buechner for prose so limpid it’s invisible. Read Dr. Seuss and play with words.

            But read. Then read some more.

            Malcolm Gladwell popularized the notion that proficiency at anything requires 10,000 hours of practice. Perhaps that’s an exaggeration; you’d need to read aloud eight hours a day for five years to reach his threshold.

            But an hour a day – even ten minutes a day – will make a difference. Choose writers who have done their apprenticeship, who have themselves earned Gladwell’s test of proficiency.

            You’ll be surprised at the effect. Eventually, the rhythm, the flow, the liquid of the language will have seeped so deeply into you that you no longer need rules.

            Of course, I’m not talking just about language. Proficiency doesn’t depend on learning rules. It comes from becoming so imbued with the culture you want to emulate, that you don’t have to think about what to do any more. It comes naturally.

*****************************************

Copyright © 2017 by Jim Taylor. Non-profit use in congregations and study groups, and links from other blogs, welcomed; all other rights reserved.

                  To comment on this column, write jimt@quixotic.ca

*****************************************

YOUR TURN

I started last week’s column by suggesting that we should stop referring to the “Theory of Evolution.”

            Ruth Shaver responded, “I have a better idea: let's STOP using the word ‘theory’ when we actually mean ‘hypothesis’ or ‘wild guess.’ Evolution is a fact, which is why it IS a theory rather than a hypothesis or a wild guess. It is also possible, though highly unlikely at this point, that evidence will come along to change the paradigm and falsify all or part of our current theory of evolution. Scientific illiteracy in general is as problematic in society as any Creationist or Intelligent Design proponents' obstruction of scientifically sound policies and legislation, in large part because people just don't understand how science works. Cleaning up our usage of language would be a good start, followed by encouraging pastors and other community leaders in non-science fields to become advocates of scientific literacy by leading the way.”

Don Schau had similar thoughts: “Your analysis of evolution is spot on. You could even label humanity’s attempts to control the planet’s resources for its own benefit an example of an evolutionary mutation that will go away with the humans that bear that gene. I have often said that the planet is not at risk. Eventually, if we do not change our ways we will become extinct and the planet will heal.

            “All that said, I think it is important to focus on the term ‘theory.’  In science and mathematics something is labeled a theory (or theorem) because it cannot be proved. While some theories, like evolution, are generally accepted, they cannot be proved. I accept evolution as a reasonable explanation but It is as impossible to prove as the existence (or not) of God. The same applies to the Big Bang. It may or may not be supplanted in the future when our knowledge base grows.

            “The real problem is that people abuse the use of the word theory to suggest that it is therefore ONLY a theory.

            “Regarding creation, I struggle to understand how people continue to read the second creation story literally. I can’t reconcile the two stories.  It is interesting, though, that the first story is quite consistent with evolution, in my opinion. The problem, of course, is the six days.  My question is, if a day is one revolution of the earth, as it is today, what was a day before the earth was formed? I don’t think the days were ever meant to be taken literally.  I find it remarkable that an early creation story like this could be so consistent with our current understanding of the sequence of events.

            “Some will struggle with a creator God. Some will struggle without one. I choose to believe in God and let God worry about the details.”

Tom Watson simply wrote, “Right on, Jim! A coelacanth? Ever see one of those up close?”

Dale Perkins: “I was stimulated by your column and thoughts about evolution. It did raise the issue for me of not attempting to influence anything -- it will evolve anyway, and we might just as well allow it to happen, unencumbered by our clumsy attempts to engineer it according to our wishes. Heard an item recently about the issue of us humans assuming we're at the top of the evolutionary ladder.  The person interviewed talked about the lowly caterpillar transforming into a butterfly, and we humans can't do anything approximating that (in spite of the tattoos and pierced body-parts). Which then is the superior species? However, we humans blithely assume every other species must bow to our wishes. Such is the constant bias…”

Finally, Steve Roney wrote an intricately reasoned letter in which, he claimed, I had demonstrated that I was actually a Creationist. I’ll quote only some key sentences:

            “You say ‘evolution never goes backwards.’ This presupposes that evolution has a direction, a goal: that it is teleological. That is a design.”

            “You say ‘evolution always moves from the simple to the complex.’ This indeed seems by observation to be so… By itself it disproves Darwin. If Darwin were right, mutations persist because they have survival value. There is no survival advantage in being complex over being simple. Ergo, given Darwinism, organisms should evolve equally often in either direction: sometimes becoming simpler, sometimes becoming more complex. Yet, in general, as you note, they do not.”

            “You say ‘evolution never puts all its eggs in one basket.’ You claim that ‘Evolution always moves toward healing.’ However you slice it, you are personifying ‘evolution’ and thinking of it as a designer. You are imputing a plan and an intent…simply calling God ‘evolution’ instead of ‘God.’ In other words, you are a Creationist…”

*******************************************

PSALM PARAPHRASES

Here’s my take on Psalm 86:1-10, 16-17

Please, God, listen to me.
I am a single mother on welfare.
I am a native boy on the reserve.
I am a refugee.

I have tried to follow your ways, God.
I have attempted to hear your will.
So save me.

You are my last hope.

I offer you myself.

You are forgiving, you are gracious,
you pour out love for everyone who claims you as a friend.

I really need you, God.

I'm at my wit's end.
The doors keep closing on me;
Who else will hear me?

You can still rescue me.
You are God. You alone are God.

Eventually, all earthly powers must acknowledge you.

You are great.

So take pity on me.
I'm a child prostitute in the Philippines.
I'm a forgotten military mistress in Vietnam.
I'm a starving bag of bones in Somalia,
I'm a bloodied victim in Alleppo.

Give me a sign.
Show me that you haven't forgotten me.

For paraphrases of most of the psalms used by the Revised Common Lectionary, you can order my book Everyday Psalms from Wood Lake Publishing, info@woodlake.com.

*******************************************

YOU SCRATCH MY BACK…

Ralph Milton most recent project, Sing Hallelujah -- the world’s first video hymnal -- consists of 100 popular hymns, both new and old, on five DVDs that can be played using a standard DVD player and TV screen, for use in congregations who lack skilled musicians to play piano or organ. More details at www.singhallelujah.ca

Isabel Gibson's thoughtful and well-written blog, www.traditionaliconoclast.com

Wayne Irwin's "Churchweb Canada," an inexpensive service for any congregation wanting to develop a web presence, with free consultation. <http://www.churchwebcanada.ca>

Alva Wood's satiric stories about incompetent bureaucrats and prejudiced attitudes in a small town are not particularly religious, but they are fun; write alvawood@gmail.com to get onto her mailing list.

Tom Watson writes a weekly blog called “The View from Grandpa Tom’s Balcony” -- ruminations on various subjects, and feedback from Tom’s readers. Write him at twatson@sentex.net

*****************************************

TECHNICAL STUFF

If you want to comment on something, send a message directly to me, jimt@quixotic.ca.

                  To subscribe or unsubscribe, send an e-mail message to jimt@quixotic.ca. Or you can subscribe electronically by sending a blank e-mail (no message or subject line) to softedges-subscribe@lists.quixotic.ca. Similarly, you can un-subscribe at softedges-unsubscribe@lists.quixotic.ca.

                  My webpage is up and running again -- thanks to Wayne Irwin and ChurchWeb Canada. You can now access current columns and about five years of archives at http://quixotic.ca

                  I write a second column each Sunday called Sharp Edges, which tends to be somewhat more cutting about social and justice issues. To sign up for Sharp Edges, write to me directly, jimt@quixotic.ca, or send a note to sharpedges-subscribe@lists.quixotic.ca

********************************************