The Little Green Grammar Book by Mark Tredinnick.

I keep this on the shelf above my desk.  It was a gift from my partner a few Christmases ago and it's just wonderful.  I refer to it often and for anyone interested in the hows and whys of grammar, it's an excellent read.

Sections include A Natural History of the Sentence, and Twenty-One Grammar Gaffes And How To Avoid Them.

Mark Tredinnick is a writer and this is a book by a writer, for writers.

He's also written The Little Red Writing Book, as well as novels and poetry.

Word Watching by Julian Burnside

You may be more familiar with Julian Burnside in his role as a barrister, and brilliant and outspoken advocate for human rights.  But he's also a very keen philologist (yes, I had to look it up too!).

I thoroughly enjoyed this book.  Julian's obvious love of English and his enthusiasm for his subject is clear and there's quite a lot of humour peppered throughout as well.

I hope you've enjoyed this little look at some of my favourite word books.  There's more, such as Bill Bryson's 'Mother Tongue' (who doesn't love Bill?), and I could not complete this post without mentioning the amazing David Crystal, whose wonderful book 'The Fight For English' is something I cherish in my library.  I'd link to his website but for some reason all the links are broken.  I'd definitely recommending checking him out though if you're at all interested in not only where our language came from, but where it's headed.  He's at the forefront of studying how our language is evolving, in particular with the rise of the Internet, 'text speak' and other linguistic changes occurring rapdily as technology advances.

I could write a blog post about hyphens easily, however I discovered that Lisa McLendon, 'head monkey' from the marvellous site Grammar Monkeys, has actually already covered everything I wanted to say about hyphens, and said it far better than I could hope to.

Therefore, with kind permission obtained from Lisa, I reproduce here some of the article "Why We Need Hyphens".

Phrases have different meanings depending on whether there’s a hyphen. These usually occur when a noun has a compound modifier, that is, a modifier that is made up of more than one word.

The classic example of this is “small-business owner” vs. “small business owner.”  Is the owner of a business diminutive, or is the business itself small? Depends on the hyphen.

Some other examples of why we need hyphens:

Because a heavy-equipment operator is not the same as a heavy equipment operator.
Because hazardous-materials training is not the same as hazardous materials training.
Because an invasive-species eradication is not the same as an invasive species eradication.
Because 10-year-old trees are not the same as 10 year-old trees.
Because an anti-child-abuse program is not the same as an anti-child abuse program.

And our favorite:
Because 300-odd editors are not the same as 300 odd editors. (Well, not necessarily.)

Why is this even a problem? Part of the reason is that in English, words can shift parts of speech without any changes. For example, a noun can be used as an adjective and there’s no special ending or change to mark it as an adjective, like “business” in “business owner.” Then an adjective can modify just the noun-turned-adjective or both nouns. So we can pile up nouns and adjectives and other parts of speech in front of one real noun being modified.  Hyphens help us direct traffic amid the pileup: they connect the elements of the compound modifier to show that the modifier should be read as one unit.

Now, this doesn’t mean that every compound modifier needs a hyphen — they’re needed only when a phrase could be read more than one way. A string of adjectives in front of a single noun is fine, as in “a big old white house.”  An adverb plus an adjective is fine, because an adverb can modify an adjective, but not a noun, so there’s no confusion: “an oddly shaped room” can be read only one way.

Reasonable people can disagree about exactly when to put in a hyphen: there are no hard and fast rules, and it’s a fine line between clarity and clutter.

Here’s a good rule of thumb, though: If the two modifying words are different parts of speech, they probably need a hyphen.
Stinky-cheese vendor (adjective-noun)
Mixed-up world (participle-preposition)
Frost-free refrigerator (noun-adjective)
Sit-in protest (verb-preposition)
Grass-fed cattle (noun-participle)

Hyphens are signals to the reader. Without them, there can be a chance for confusion. And even if one can make the argument that it’s clear what the phrase “really means,” any potential stumbling block for readers should be fixed — a smooth ride for readers means they focus on the message.

Thanks Lisa, for setting it out in such a clear way.

From a medical perspective, hyphens are also critical.  There is a vast difference between a patient having "six monthly venesection' and "six-monthly venesection".  The former technically means the patient has one venesection every month for six months, whilst the latter (which is the correct one) means that the patient has venesection twice a year, ie. every six months.

We also make good use of hyphens for things such as "I reviewed this mother-of-two in the clinic today".  Without the hyphens, it looks like there is a word missing: "I reviewed this mother of two in the clinic today".  Mother of two what? It looks as if there is a word missing between 'two' and 'in'.  We hyphenate in these instances for clarity.  Likewise, a phrase such as "out-of-pocket expenses" is quite different to "out of pocket expenses".  The latter doesn't even make sense! What are these pocket expenses you are out of? Hyphens are valuable clarifiers in our written language.

As Lisa says, it can often be a moot point where to place a hyphen but I feel is important to learn the correct placement of them if you can, because the bottom line is for the patient's letter or report to be as clear and concise as possible.  There should be no room for misunderstandings in medical transcription.

Happy hyphenating! (thanks Helen)

For the self-employed MT, time quite literally is money.  So it makes sense to make use of as many time-saving programs as you can get your hands on, to increase your efficiency and output.

In the past, smart typists made good use of things such as macros, autotext and autocorrect functions in Word.  I still use these functions extensively when I work on-site for clients.

These days, we have even more options available in the form of things such as text expanders.

A text expander is a program that you add codes or shortcuts to, to enable you to type more quickly and efficiently.  One of the best little investments I ever made for my business was to purchase a licence for a text expander program called Shorthand for Windows.  It's not the most sophisticated program but it more than does the job and I can't praise it highly enough.  I have used it for more than five years now and have something close to 2000 shortcuts and codes in it.  The program runs in the background once you turn it on, and it works in whatever you're typing.  It doesn't have to be a Word document, it will work in an email program, on a forum, on Twitter, Facebook - anywhere! I think I paid something like $AUD100 for a lifetime licence (it was years ago so I can't remember the exact cost but it wasn't much) and I can confidently say it's paid for itself several times over.

It is almost to the point where I do type in a form of shorthand; my codes are so embedded in my head and if I ever find myself on another computer somewhere and start typing, I automatically start typing in code, which of course doesn't work on another computer and it ends up looking quite strange! And you quickly realise the benefit of it when you find yourself back to typing everything out in full again.

Text expander programs are absolutely invaluable to the busy MT.  I mean, why type something like bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy out in full each time when you can type a simple code? For the example shown here, my code is bsalp.  Five keystrokes as opposed to 30! I use codes for everything from complex medical terms, to standard greetings such as "It was a pleasure to see" (code = iwapts).  I have found that for recurrent phrases, using the first letter of each word is the best way to go, however sometimes you get several phrases with the same first letter combination.  In this case, I put them all in the one code, separated by a forward slash and then just delete the one I don't want.  Here is an example.  If I type the code wba, I get "will be arranged/would be appropriate/would be available".  Similarly, if I type iha I get "I have arranged/advised" and simply delete the word I don't want.

There are plenty of other text expander programs out there, including ones which can hold entire standard letters.  I haven't used them but I have heard good reports about them.

Using a text expander program will not only save you time and allow you to earn more, it also saves your poor, hardworking little fingers.  Make the investment.  You'll never regret it.

Medical transcription is not verbatim typing.  Medical typing is all about clarity of information and presenting that information in the correct and formal way.  This means expanding spoken contractions.  For example, just because a doctor dictates "he hasn't been taking his medication recently", does not mean you type it that way.  You would type "he has not been taking his medication recently".  Similarly, if a doctor mixes up a patient's gender or gets the tense wrong (ie. "she has an ultrasound last January"), a good MT will change it so that it reads correctly.  The same goes for setting out - clear paragraphing and correct punctuation - even if not dictated.

I do know of many MTs who transcribe absolutely verbatim, regardless of how incorrect it looks on the page.  I don't work that way and I don't think it's a good habit for any MT to get into.  Contractions in a professional medical report look sloppy.  Dictating physicians often dictate in a hurry; of course they use contractions, but they don't expect them to be transcribed.

It is entirely possible to transcribe a dictated letter or report into full and correct English without changing the context. I recommend that MTs get into the habit of automatically correcting grammatical mistakes made in dictation, as well as expanding all dictated contractions.  A properly set out letter looks better all round: for the client, for the person receiving it, and of course for the patient.

Taking that little extra time shows that you are a professional who cares about the quality of work you are producing.  I think that's something well worth cultivating.

Many times I've QA'd work and known immediately that the MT didn't have her mind on the job and was just typing what she heard rather than actively listening to what was being said.  Examples of this include typing such things as "She has lost 45 kg in the last two months".  Now unless you are really, really sick, no one loses 45 kg in eight weeks! Of course what was dictated was "She has lost 4 to 5 kg...", but said quickly, and without listening properly, it could sound like 45.

Accents can also present a challenge in the hearing versus listening area.  I'll never forget many years ago seeing an MT type that a patient had "duck urine"! Of course, it was dark urine but the physician's accent made it sound like duck.  Hilarious as this error was, it also showed that the MT was clearly not taking notice of what was being said and just typing automaton-like, without thinking, and that's never good.  As long as a physician speaks clearly, an accent should not be a problem for an MT who is actively listening to what is being said, and not just hearing it.

Another example is when a dictating physician makes an error.  This does happen occasionally, believe it or not.  Many MTs take the line that whatever is dictated must be correct, and that it is 'not their place' to correct or question.  I disagree.  If an error is dictated and you know it is an error, then the right thing to do is to draw the physician's attention to it, either by correcting it and noting the correction, or by making a time stamp mark and querying what was dictated with a note along the lines of "is this correct?", to alert them to it.  Most dictating physicians are dictating multiple letters or clinics in one hit, often at night, and the odd error is bound to slip through.  A good MT knows this and corrects and notes accordingly.  Doctors aren't infallible and in my experience, they (and/or the practice staff) are very grateful for having an error pointed out so it can be fixed.

An MT who masters the skill of active listening as opposed to just hearing what is being said, makes herself all the more valuable in the industry.