|
Prologue |
6.00 p.m |
Register and pay for dinner at the door (cheques and money orders preferred - if paying by cash please bring the exact amount) |
|
Act 1 |
6.00 p.m. |
Canapes and reception drinks |
|
Act 2 |
6.30 p.m. |
|
|
Act 3 |
7.30 p.m. |
Fine dining $30 Turkish banquet. |
|
Act 4 |
. |
Movie star quiz |
|
Act 5 |
. |
Presentation of prizes |
In keeping with the ambience, wear something theatrical, or dress to impress.
Please contact me on 6259 3360 (h) or <helen.topor@cit.act.edu.au> about dietary needs and acceptances (AGM and/or dinner) by Wednesday, 21 July. See you there!
Helen Topor
- The next meeting: Wednesday 28 July
- Indigenous publishing
- President's column
- National conference
- New member
- From the editor's desk
- Gorm-less indeed!
- A little of what you fancy ... just between us
- Competition winner
- A big day in
- Review: The Cambridge Guide to English Usage
- Review: Death Sentence: the Decay of Public Language
- Follow up to the Microsoft Word session at Ed-Ex
- Communication is in the delivery
- Poem: grammar groping
- Copyright and deadline
[None of the personal comments and observations given here represent the views of AIATSIS or IAD Press.]
Gabby Lhuede was the speaker at the society's general meeting in June. In an entertaining talk, Gabby briefly outlined her professional background and went on to give her spellbound audience a fascinating account of what it's like to work as a 'white-fella' in an Indigenous publishing environment. A lively discussion ensued.
After thirteen years working in publishing in Melbourne (Blackwell Science, CSIRO Publishing and Melbourne University Press), Gabby packed pen, pencil, rubber and loupe into the car and headed north to Alice Springs, where she worked as production manager and designer with IAD (Institute for Aboriginal Development) Press - one of three Indigenous publishing houses in Australia. Eighteen months later, she loaded up the car again and drove south to Canberra. She's now working with Aboriginal Studies Press, which is the publishing department of the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.
As a non-Indigenous person working in an Indigenous publishing house, Gabby considers it very important to remember the relationship that an editor has with an author, and especially the impact that an editor has on how the final manuscript is presented and interpreted. For Indigenous writers the main concern is that non-Indigenous editors often misunderstand the content of their manuscripts, and alter language and style to cater for a mainstream audience which is non-Indigenous.
Non-Indigenous publishers and editors should therefore be aware that formal protocols do exist. These offer appropriate ways of using Indigenous cultural material and interacting with Indigenous people and their communities (whether urban, rural or remote). The protocols encourage ethical conduct and promote interaction based on good faith and mutual respect. Anybody working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people or with any culturally sensitive material would do well to read the references at the end of this article.
As to more practical protocols (and Gabby's experience here is with remote communities), it is advisable that non-Indigenous women wear baggy pants or long skirts, and cover their arms. Sit beside the person, not face to face. Do not make direct eye contact; do not ask direct personal questions. Wait to be invited to speak, and remember (as in any communication) that consultation and negotiation are signs of respect and deference. Do not expect answers immediately; allow time for people to think and to discuss matters informally with their community. Be aware that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have very close relationships with their family and community, and that an individual's work involves them all. Be sensitive to cultural practices with regard to Sorry Business and other family or community business.
When arranging a time to visit a community, do not give a precise time; be flexible: in the morning, early afternoon, or evening. Most importantly, always encourage and allow ownership of the work: explain the editorial and production process so that the author knows what is involved (avoiding the use of publishing acronyms and jargon); have personal meetings to review the editing (rather than letters or phone calls); and show them text and cover designs, and allow time for consideration.
Throughout her time at IAD Press, Gabby had the following list pinned up on her board:
(from Protocols for Consultation and Negotiation with Aboriginal People, Queensland Department of Families, Youth & Community Care, 1997)
1. Terri Janke, Our Culture: Our Future - Report on Australian Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights, AIATSIS and ATSIC, Sydney, 1999. This report may be downloaded at <http://www.icip.lawnet.com.au/>.
2. Writing Cultures: Protocols for Producing Indigenous Australian Literature, Australia Council, 2002.
3. Writing about Indigenous Australia: Some Issues to Consider and Protocols to Follow, Australian Society of Authors, March 2004.
Gabby Lhuede and Ara Nalbandian
Those of you who joined us at Madew's on Lake George will agree that Ed-Ex was a great triumph (cold conditions in the cellar notwithstanding). Over ninety of us spent an exciting, enjoyable and informative day listening to speakers and meeting fellow editors.
The response to this initiative was very heartening and my thanks go to the stalwart organisers, Cathy Nicoll and Jenny Cook, who were responsible for the planning and execution of the project, and who contributed many, many hours to ensuring the success of the day.
We are planning to provide more training on some of the topics touched on during Ed-Ex. Jenny and Cathy are now looking at the evaluations and comments from participants to see what you would like in future seminars.
The next major activity for the society is the AGM this month. We look forward to seeing as many of you as possible for this important event. In line with our constitution, we need to elect a new secretary, and we also need a treasurer, a training coordinator, a publicity and hospitality coordinator, a newsletter production manager, and possibly a new vice-president. Of course there are always positions open for general committee members. Office holders of the committee must be full members of the society but associate members are able to take on any of the other positions.
Greg Baker, who has been responsible for newsletter production, has recently resigned from the committee. Thank you, Greg, for all the work you have put into this important task.
See you at the AGM!
Claudia Marchesi
26-29 September 2004, Greenmount Beach Resort, Coolangatta (just 300 metres from the beach!)
This exciting conference will include a broad range of activities about the business of writing and communicating science and medical information: interactive plenary sessions, members' submitted papers, research insights sessions, and professional development workshops on a broad range of topics relating to communicating science and medical information through different media.
If you are involved in writing, editing or publishing in science or medicine, you will be sure to find something in the program to interest you. With a planned attendance of about 200 like-minded folk the conference will provide a wonderful opportunity for networking.
For more information and draft program go to:
<http://www.medicalwriters.org> or <http://www.asc.asn.au/conf/index.html>
Janet Salisbury (Canberra Society of Editors)
Tel. (02) 6282 2280
Email: <janet.salisbury@biotext.com.au>
The Canberra Society of Editors welcomes Sandra Hatch as a new associate member.
With the new financial year upon us, excitement is mounting (at least among committee members) as the AGM draws near. This year's AGM promises to be an exciting one in the company of stars, thanks to Helen Topor's vivid imagination, which we hope participants will match with appropriate outfits.
It has been an eventful year for the society. Our Christmas dinner at the Rock Salt Café in Hawker was a convivial end-of-year event. We enjoyed the renowned menu and service, and were entertained by Jack Waterford's spirited and witty talk on his own experiences, especially in journalism, and on Don Watson's book, Death sentence; coincidentally, you may wish to see page 9 for Tracy Harwood's review of this book. Ed-Ex was highly popular - as you'll see from the feedback comments published elsewhere in this newsletter - and we look forward to more training of this calibre in 2004-05. Cathy Nicoll and Jenny Cook did an outstanding job in their organisation of the event.
This is the last newsletter in which Greg Baker will be involved as production editor. I would like to thank Greg for his expertise, cooperation and support throughout the year. His cheerful disposition and sensible outlook made it a pleasure working with him.
As our president, Claudia Marchesi, has mentioned in her report, several of the committee positions are up for grabs, including, of course, that of production editor. I would urge anyone who has an interest in layout and graphic design to consider nominating for this position, without which we would not be able to produce a printed version of the newsletter.
Finally, I'd like to hear your comments on the newsletter. Has it met your expectations in the past year? Is there anything you'd like to see more (or less) of in the newsletter? Are there any other items that could be included?
I look forward to seeing you at the AGM and to reading or hearing your comments.
Ara Nalbandian
On the day of The Wedding, The Canberra Times noted that Mary Donaldson was marrying into 'one family that's not Gorm-less'. The dreadful pun played on the name of the earliest known member of Europe's oldest royal house: Gorm the Old, born about 910 and died in 958, so not all that old, really. To spoil a good pun, Gorm himself didn't even spell his name like that - on a tombstone erected in memory of his wife around 950 and still visible in the little town of Jelling, the mason clearly chiselled kurmur kunukr, 'King Kurm'.
Obviously, you would have to be pretty gormless to believe that Gorm was the original gorm in gormless, although that source may well be Scandinavian. The Old Norse gaum, gaumr meant attention or understanding, and English dialect gormless now means lacking in sense, foolish, not very bright. Looking back to that gaum, you would think that calling someone a gorm without the -less would be a compliment. Paradoxically, not so: even a right gorm is no less gormless. And, like old Gorm, spelling varied in earlier times: it turns up as gawmless in the mid-18th century, gawmbless a little later. Emily Bronte uses gaumless in Wuthering Heights. Gormless indeed …
Some other words meaning 'foolish' have similarly interesting pedigrees. When the critic James Agate called Cordelia 'a gumph, or as we say in Lancashire, gormless', he used a word descended from gumption, itself close to gorm. If you aren't showing any gumph you are probably being gumptionless. Another dialect word for a simple fellow is gowk, an old English term for a cuckoo. And if you've gone cuckoo, that could be serious too.
What about barmy? The froth on top of fermenting beer is known as barm, so if you are barmy-brained (or just plain barmy) you may be a bit of an airhead. And goofy? The word was around long before Disney gave it to one of his lovable characters: back in the 16th century a goff or guff was a fool, and modern Italian still uses goffo to mean awkward or clumsy.
But do I detect, in all these words, a tiny undercurrent of affection? Perhaps a little gormlessness at the right moment can be a good thing.
Peter Judge
Or just among us? It used to depend on whether we were referring to two or more than two - we kept between for two: the job was divided between you and me, and among for more than two: the job was shared among all of us. It is becoming more acceptable to use between for all such situations, though my particular fancy is to stick to the traditional usage.
Other pairs of words are also confusing. I've picked out the ones that seem to give most problems (based on those that I have to correct most frequently when I'm editing). There are plenty more.
affect, effect
Except in one special usage, affect is always a verb: The rise in the price of petrol will affect the cost of holidays. It is pronounced [aFFECT'] with the emphasis on the last syllable.
Affect as a noun is pronounced [A'ffect] and is only used in the psychological sense of a highly sensitised state of mind, passion, emotion (from Jungian psychology). Its adjective is affective and the adverb affectively: His decision to resign from the board was affectively based, not based on reason.
Effect can function as a noun or a verb [eFFECT']: The effect of his decision was to create a vacancy on the board. The doctor's treatment effected [brought about] a cure.
consists, comprises
These two are easily confused because they are used in similar contexts. However, consists is always followed by of while comprises is not. The new course consists of four main sections. The new course comprises four main sections.
imply, infer
Basically, a listener infers something [draws an inference] from what a speaker implies [suggests]. Are you implying that I am not up to undertaking the job? I infer from what you say that you think I'm incompetent.
lay, lie
Lay has only one meaning - to put down: Lay the books on the table. Lie can mean recline or be untruthful: If you lie in the sun, you will get sunburnt; if you lie to a judge in court, you are committing perjury. The past tenses and past participles of these verbs cause problems too. The past tense and past participle of lay is laid: I laid the table for dinner; He has always laid his books on this desk. The past tense of lie (recline) is lay and the past participle is lain: I lay on my bed for half an hour; I have lain on my bed for long enough. The past tense and past participle of lie (be untruthful) is lied: The witness lied when giving his evidence; she has lied about her age ever since she turned 30.
who, whom
These relative pronouns cause a lot of confusion. There is a rumour about that whom is disappearing from English. I hope that's not true - it's very useful. Who is always the subject of a clause. Whom is always in the predicate of a sentence, either as the object of a verb of the object of a preposition. This is the person who can help you. This is the person whom we rewarded for bravery. This is the person to whom we gave a medal for bravery. It may help to break the sentence down to see which should be used:
• This is the person + She (the same person) can help you = This is the person who can help you.
• This is the person + We rewarded him for bravery = This is the person whom we rewarded for bravery.
• This is the person + We gave (to) him a medal for bravery = This is the person to whom we gave a medal for bravery.
Maybe that distinction will disappear eventually, and we'll all happily accept This is the person who we rewarded for bravery *. I will continue to observe the distinction in my speech and writing, but I'll probably be in the minority. (The asterisk denotes a structure that is not entirely acceptable.)
Already perfectly acceptable in speech is This is the person we gave a medal for bravery to. I doubt whether it's yet completely acceptable in formal writing.
These examples were derived from a list of confusing pairs of words collected in Letter Writing Simplified (revised) by G. Snodgrass and E. M. Murphy, Pitman, Melbourne, 1986.
Elizabeth Murphy
Jeanette Swayn has been declared the winner of the $20 bottle of red offered in the May newsletter. Jeanette can get her bottle by contacting Ed Highley on <ed@clarusdesign.com>.
After months of hard work by a small but dedicated team of people, Ed-Ex took place on 5 June and was an enormous success. We attracted almost 100 editors, old and new, who learnt many interesting things from twelve speakers from Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne. Everyone enjoyed the chance to learn more about specific areas relating to working as an editor in Canberra. Most participants (94 per cent) thought the day was a great success.
The networking opportunity was also an important element of the day. Our longer-term members enjoyed catching up with old friends and our new members benefited from meeting like-minded people. Non-members were, we hope, encouraged to join. The organising team learnt from the experience thanks, in part, to those many people who completed their evaluation form.
Some aspects we can improve next time include: location of seminars - instead of being atmospheric and romantic, the cellar was cold, damp and musty; lunch - to be served with salad or vegetables; and transport - the bus wasn't on time because the driver took longer than planned to defrost the doors, frozen shut by a -8º frost. Perhaps the next Ed-Ex should be held earlier in the year.
On the positive side, the restaurant was cosy and warm, with lovely views over vineyards and Lake George. A planned wine tasting turned into a friendly drink and chat because Mr Madew's plane was delayed, but we were all ready for something informal by then.
Thanks to the committee for supporting the idea; to our speakers for their time and effort in preparing and presenting such interesting sessions; to Cathy Nicholl, Jenny Cook, Tracy Harwood, Ann Parkinson, Claudia Marchesi and Louise Oliver for their hard work in organising the event and processing registration forms and cheques; to Pirion Printers, Writer's Bookcase and Design Emergency for presenting trade stands; to Hire Intelligence for bringing and setting up the audiovisual equipment; and to Madew Winery for providing a beautiful venue, and delicious food and wine.
The training coordinator will be using your evaluation forms to plan future training courses and general meeting speakers. So, if topics of interest to you clashed on the day or you would like the opportunity to expand on a topic that you heard, look out for news of them in the newsletter and on the website <www.editorscanberra.org>.
Some speakers provided a written summary of their talk. These summaries will be on the society's website.
The organising subcommittee
This is a beautifully produced book, a joy to look at and to use. But there are other books of English usage around - I have Burchfield's 1996 revision of Fowler's Modern English Usage and Nick Hudson's 1993 Modern Australian Usage on my shelf, not to mention the Penguin Usage and Abusage (Eric Partridge, revised Janet Whitcut 1994) and our own Shirley Purchase's 1997 Australian Writers' Dictionary, which resolves quite a number of usage issues very compactly. What makes this one different?
The date of publication has to be a major factor. The way we use our language is changing rapidly in response to the influences of television, the Internet, and the ubiquitous mobile phone and its SMS. As editors we need to be aware of these changes, even if our clients hire us to maintain (or restore!) a 'classic' style in their documents. But which style is that? It may depend very much on our generation, or where we were born. As a former Pom with a mere thirty years' residence in Australia, I still find it strange to hear 'on the weekend' where I would say 'at', or 'down the coast' where I would say 'down to' or 'down at'. In this elusive field, the more recent our information, the more we can trust it.
Then, I would put the way in which the guide has been compiled. The entries are not based on Pam's opinions, however much we might respect them, but on two enormous electronic text collections, or 'corpora': the 100-million-word British National Corpus and the 140-million-word Cambridge International Corpus of American English. These giant collections contain both published material and transcriptions of the spoken word. They are fully searchable and enable researchers to derive statistics of actual current usage. This means Pam can say, for example, in looking at the spelling of convener/convenor that the -er form is represented 2:1 in American English but about equally (slight preference for -or) in the United Kingdom. Either is right? Neither is wrong? It may depend on the client and the nature of the job, as so often is the case in our work. If we are faced with this dilemma, it helps us to be confident, whichever version we pick.
A big reference work such as this needs some navigational aids. Fortunately there is a map at the front showing the way many of the key entries fit into four main conceptual blocks: Style and Structure of Writing, Words, Editorial Style, and Grammar. Each of these again has four or five subdivisions, in each of which there are ten or so headings of major articles, many of which contain pointers to other entries. A glance through these headings makes it very easy to go straight to a topic such as jargon, euphemisms, non-sexist language or dangling participles. Or 'Australian English', which is most interestingly read alongside the similar articles on American, British, Canadian, New Zealand and South African English, not to mention 'Englishes', International English and pidgin or creole.
The approach is descriptive rather than prescriptive, and the coverage is pretty comprehensive. And having written that, I checked the guide. Sure enough, there are a couple of paragraphs looking at the use of pretty as an amplifier or downtoner, with a side look at the British quite, warning of its indeterminacy (I, of course, meant it as an amplifier) and concluding that 'pragmatics are at issue rather than style'. Quite.
There are 4000 entries, some of which are quite extensive articles on topics like 'Agreement', 'Such (as)' or even the word 'the' or the letter '-e'. They cover points of meaning, spelling, grammar, punctuation, effective writing and argument. Whenever appropriate, there are comparisons of American, British and Australian usage.
The entries are written in an easy, readable and understandable style. Pam even introduces occasional unexpected flashes of humour: 'a fortiori: this elliptical phrase, borrowed from Latin, means roughly "by way of something stronger." Far from being an oblique reference to fetching the whisky, it's used in formal discussion … '.
All in all, a delightful book that certainly passes the critical Timewaste Test - once you open it and find what you are looking for, there is an almost irresistible temptation to go on to dip into something else, and then something more, and so on ... But this is the only fault I can find with it. Thoroughly recommended!
What is more, CUP is offering a 20 per cent discount to members of the Canberra Society of Editors, valid to the end of August. Details are on our web notice board at <www.editorscanberra.org/notices.htm>. For good measure, CUP has added a number of other books to its 20 per cent discount offer and these are also listed on that web page.
Peter Judge
My high school history teacher was one of the best English teachers I had. An enduring lesson in essay writing was to follow a simple structure: have a beginning, a middle and an end. Each paragraph should mirror that plan, in that one should say what one intends to say, say it, then say what was said (introduce, explain, conclude). I have always thought this a sound guide; one doesn't have to be rigorously formulaic about it. For example, had Don Watson followed that plan even a little, his extended essay on the deterioration of modern language would have been much easier to read.
It seems inevitable today that many public documents - superannuation reports, electricity bills, guides to this and that in everyday life - are dry and dull to read. They are simply not interesting subjects (or perhaps not worth the time to make them interesting from a literary viewpoint). Part of Don Watson's argument is that this kind of literature could at least be more plainly and simply written, making it more palatable (and understandable). I was relieved to learn this: I have become mindlessly accustomed to insurance letters and the like being poorly phrased and proofread, with the vague idea that, since English expression is (apparently) not the writers' expertise, they can be excused. Of course, that is a ridiculous notion, because clear communication is important, no matter what one's business. I agree with Watson that continual careless and negligent use of the English language perpetuates its decay.
The book is divided into an introduction, four chapters and a satirical glossary. Chapters are not numbered or named, but the theme for each is roughly indicated by a quote at the beginning of that chapter. The text that follows is rammed with ideas and examples presented in a disconcertingly unstructured way. It wasn't difficult to follow the general argument (observations about modern abuses of the English language), but it was difficult to follow individual threads. This perception was reinforced when I flicked back through the book to write this review and struggled to find a discrete passage; they all blend into one another.
The first chapter is long (56 pages), and describes the sort of language that is typical of companies, the media and politics. Watson says that corporate writing often makes no sense. He gives plenty of examples, such as this one from the Victorian Government:
These reviews will be important inputs to future government action, including our assessment of the need to take action to increase baseload. (p. 47)
There are lots of promising arguments, but it is difficult to follow where one point ends and another begins. Many of today's common terms and phrases - 'muck' - are aired, including enhance, prioritise, key strategic initiatives, outcomes, committed, productivity-driven, accountable, the bottom line, at this point in time, at the end of the day, benchmark, best practice, seamless, in terms of, aspirational, core business, challenge, empower and move forward (there are more). Watson shows how these words are overused, making writing and speech boring, unintelligible or evasive. He calls contemporary public language 'sludge' and blames marketing for much of today's phraseology.
The second chapter is a very short (13 pages) whinge about the apparent inability of Australians to invent 'rousing words'. Americans (Martin Luther King, Mark Twain, Abraham Lincoln) and the British (Winston Churchill) have left memorable words on the public record, whereas Australians have failed to do so.
The third chapter elaborates on the theme of invigorating and inspiring speech, and the language of leaders. Watson describes how political language often resembles that of marketing and propaganda. He continues to use plenty of examples in the vein of chapter one, but focuses on the language of politicians, lamenting their 'tired prose' and 'dead words'.
The last chapter is an amalgam of Watson's views about grammar, expression, words that tell the truth, his desire for more verbs in public writing, elocution, clichés in sport and elsewhere, school curriculums, his wish for more 'beautiful arrangement[s] of words', and marketing. It's a gentle diatribe where subjects are briefly expanded in a random and unconnected kind of way.
This book reflects a lot of George Orwell's complaints in Politics and the English Language, written nearly sixty years ago. Although different words are now fashionable, not a lot else has changed. Both authors provide a useful historical record of the evolution of the English language. Watson's volume would be more useful as a reference source if it had an index.
I thought Watson's a good commentary, reflecting fairly accurately a lot of the language that is used in today's public forums. I did think some of his expression a bit laboured, as if he were trying too hard to be original and to avoid using the very words he was criticising. He is a prize-winning author (five awards for Recollections of a Bleeding Heart), and I expected this book to be lucid, smoothly argued. Instead I found it disjointed and unstructured, even hard going at times. Despite these faults, it was still interesting and funny. However, I found that Orwell expressed his ideas more clearly.
Tracy Harwood
If you went to the Microsoft Word session at Ed-Ex, you will have heard about my notes on how I use Word, titled Bend Word to Your Will and published on the Web. The material presented during the session was intended to be supplemented by these notes because of time constraints. But you may have had difficulty downloading them: unfortunately, a changed URL for the download, of which I was advised just before the Ed-Ex weekend, was incorrect. It should have been <www.word.mvps.org/FAQs/WordMac/Bend/BendWord.htm>.
The parts of Bend Word to Your Will that should be read to consolidate the presentation are as follows:
• pages 16 to 18 for some important notes on settings required before you use Bend Word to Your Will
• pages 88 to 91 for various topics involved in managing styles, starting with a quick method for removing styles when documents are received from others
• appendix A for the main 'minimum maintenance' features of documents that avoid formatting 'coming unstuck' when the document is subsequently changed
• appendix C for specifications of styles to minimise the likelihood of changed appearance on other computers
• page 63 onwards for a summary of styles and templates and their management.
Since Bend Word to Your Will is, for the most part, arranged by self-contained dictionary-style entries, it is easiest to find entries by using Word's 'Find' command, although clicking on page numbers in the table of contents is also useful.
My recommended settings for Word are also written up in Bend Word to Your Will, on pages 29 to 33.
The 'comment' feature that I demonstrated is described on pages 94 and 95.
Sources of good information about Word are on pages 19 to 24.
Not mentioned in the Ed-Ex session, because of time constraints, was using AutoCorrect to expand on terms keyed in 'shorthand' and AutoText to insert, for example, pre-formatted tables, by using a keyboard shortcut. These features are described on pages 42 and 91 respectively.
PC users should download the Zipped versions of the main document and the template; Mac users should choose the Stuffit versions.
Clive Huggan
I was talking to a professional writer who is well established in Canberra about a key deliverable they were required to present to a client the next day. Confident in their written word, they were not so in the delivery. As we know, the delivery of the written word is as important to the communication process as the words themselves.
You press the print button with your fingers crossed because you are unsure of the software you are using. Has something similar happened to you when preparing something important for a client?
This fear can be avoided by introducing some basic training and procedures that keep the process in your control.
Recently, clients have asked me to increase their familiarity with the range of creative software available, allowing them to communicate better with their clients. Additionally, they want to be more informed and undertake some of the less complex in-house design projects themselves, thus complementing their written skills without the fear of a nasty surprise waiting for them at the printer.
So, after thirty-five years of designing and 'putting ink on paper', I have established a Creative Training Studio in Braddon. My current client base includes science and education writers, professional trainers, designers, and project officers in government departments.
Class size ranges from one to seven with a focus on the Adobe Creative Suite of products, consisting of InDesign, Photoshop, Illustrator and Acrobat Professional. The more I train in this package, the more I am impressed with its creative features, integration and usability.
If you would like some custom training please contact me at:
Bill Pearson, Unit 7, 14 Lonsdale Street, Braddon ACT 2612
<www.hallstudio.com.au>
Contact: <bill@hallstudio.com.au>
or 0419 489 606 (mobile).
Greg Baker
grammar groping
- the strong burly adjective
- stretched out his dangling arm
- and pulled the wideeyed noun
- into his sentence
- i want to hyphenate you
- he whispered
- oh no
- came the reply
- im a proper noun
- not for long
- he replied
- as he proceeded to modify her
- perfect grammar
- said the gratified adjective
- yes it was complete
- agreed the contented noun
- but she added
- you should have used some
punctuation
- Gail Ghai
The Canberra Editor is published by
Canberra Society of Editors, PO Box 3222,
Manuka ACT 2603. © Canberra Society of Editors 2004. ISSN
1039-3358
Email contributions, using Word for Windows (essential), to: ara.nalbandian@defence.gov.au
If by snail mail, then send them on a 3.5 inch disk, to Canberra Society of Editors, PO Box 3222, Manuka ACT 2603. If mailing, always provide a printout as well.
up to Contents