Posted by Jon under Word play & writing | 
Spotted recently, pinned to a hand-dryer:
This facility is unavailable due to essential maintenance works
… because ‘broken’ really would have been too simple.
Along similar lines, on a trip to Versailles a month or so ago:
The tour continues on the opposite side of the peristyle.
OK, make me feel stupid. Peristyle? Where do I go now? Oh – you mean the walkway with columns that I’m standing in.
Why is it that people writing notices – or proposals – feel the need to try and impress the reader with overly-grandiose language? And don’t they realise that, in their attempts to impress, they actually achieve the very opposite?
And then sometimes there’s stuff that’s just weird – like the name of the shop I passed in my cab en route to Abu Dhabi airport, all-too-early the other morning having run a course there for a great group:
Syria Flower Butchery
No, I couldn’t work it out either. But there seemed to be more flowers around than carcasses, and I’d be more than a little concerned about asking them to make up a bouquet…
Posted by BJ under Word play & writing |
I saw a recent piece (delivered to me as a ‘pop-up’ while using Yahoo) which presented common typos missed by spell check. The article also highlighted many words which are commonly confused or misused. I’ve edited this slightly, giving it a slant towards proposals. I’m passing this along as a reminder for words we should be double checking when editing/proofing your submissions.
Please feel free to provide any words that you see repeatedly that Spell Check failed to catch.
————————————————————————–
Affect versus Effect
There is a lot of confusion around these two words. Keep this in mind to keep the two straight: “Affect” is a verb and “effect” is a noun. It’s as simple as that.
Farther versus Further (versus Father)
While both words refer to distance, grammarians distinguish “farther” as physical distance and “further” as metaphorical distance. You can dive further into a project, for instance, or you can dive farther into the ocean. And we all do know what ‘Father’ means, right? Unfortunately, spell check will allow all of these words in whatever context you choose to use them.
From and Form
Sure, you know the difference with these two words. Spell check doesn’t (this is a typical typo for me, especially when my fingers are flying over the keys just a bit to fast!)
Its versus It’s (and all other apostrophes):
According to a copy editing instructor for California-based copy editing service provider confusing “its” and “it’s” is the most common error in the English language. That one minuscule apostrophe (or lack thereof) drastically changes the meaning of the entire sentence. “It’s” is a contraction of “it is,” whereas “its” refers to possession.
“Your” versus “You’re” falls into the same category. Your, a pronoun, is the possessive case of ‘you’. ‘You’re’ is a contraction of “you are”.
Sales versus Sails
Can you imagine presenting with a proposal that you will help them “…increase sails by 20 percent”?! Unless the proposal happens to be to a manufacturer of sails (the kind that are used on sailboats!), this careless mistake will probably get your proposal sailing right into the recycling bin.
Supposed To, not Suppose To
“Suppose” is a verb, meaning to think or to ponder. Used in the past tense, this verb is “supposed”, as in “I was supposed to make sure I didn’t use ‘suppose to’”.
Their versus There versus They’re
“Their” is possessive; “there” refers to distance; and “they’re” is a contraction of “they”.
Then versus Than
Six is more than five. If you add one to five, then you have six. “Than” refers to a comparison, while “then” refers to a subsequent event.
Threw versus Through (and thru) versus (Thorough)
“He threw the ball through the window.” “Threw” is the past tense of the verb “to throw”. “Thru’ is this word spelled incorrectly and should never be used!). “Through” is a preposition meaning ‘in at one end, side, or surface and out at the other:’ And speaking of “through,” be careful to make sure you don’t actually mean “thorough” or vice versa. Thorough is an adjective meaning ‘complete, executed without omission’. Like many of the words mentioned here, this slight variation in spelling will not be picked up by a computer, and could easily be missed by an editor or proofreader, especially if they are rushing through a document. Writing “We are through when it comes to editing/ proofreading our proposals” when you mean to write “We are thorough…” is rather ironic.
Waist vs. waste
Waist is a noun, describing the part of the body between the ribs and the hips, usually the narrowest part of a person’s body. Waste is a verb, typically used in conjunction with an object, and is defined as to consume, spend, or employ uselessly or without adequate return; use to no avail or profit; squander: If you always eat everything on your plate, your waist will likely go to waste.
Wonder versus Wander
You can wander around while you wonder why “wander” and “wonder” have such different meanings, yet sound oh so similar.
Would Have, not Would of
This common mispronunciation has led to the rampant misuse of this phrase. However “would of” is never correct and will most likely make it appear as if your proposal was a written by someone lacking language skills.
Posted by Jon under Word play & writing |
Dinner in a Parisian restaurant recently; there’s a notice pinned to a box on the wall:
Your comments interest us.
I love that they’re curious to hear what you think; that they’ll weigh up what you say and – in the refreshing underlying implication of the message – that they may well conclude that whilst you are entitled to your opinion, it may be entirely wrong.
Feedback on proposals – from customers or team members – is always facinating to hear. Yet, of course, it’s not always correct, fair – or, necessarily, honest: people do play games to protect their own position, avoid conflict, transfer blame, claim credit, seize the moral high ground, dodge further actions. It’s why strong, impartial facilitation of these debriefs and workshops is so important.
Posted by Jon under Word play & writing |
There are so many skills associated with developing a first-class proposal: project management, team leadership, facilitation of each stage of the proposal process, design, document management and many more.
But what of writing? The longer I work on proposals, the more I come to appreciate that lots of the best people out there at managing proposals out there are actually pretty mediocre wordsmiths.
So: you work in the world of proposals. (At least I assume so! If not, the web’s full of far more interesting sites for you than The Proposal Guys!). What are you like as a writer? Honestly?
My test, I guess, is whether you write for pleasure. I find that most folks who can write proposal content that really flows invariably also write outside office hours – perhaps a blog, or fiction, or for some society or local journal.
Writers write – incessantly, addictively. And if you don’t – if your skills are in some of the other, equally critical elements of the proposal process – perhaps you need to surround yourself with a few wordsmiths if you want inject a little magic into your proposals.
If you do write cool stuff that’s online, why not add a comment with a link? We’re always on the hunt for cool stuff to read!
Posted by Jon under Word play & writing |
How about this, for a clause taken from a real-life ITT we reviewed recently:
“10.3 At the end of the Contract all data shall be handed back to the Authority and the Contractor shall be destroyed”
You know, sometimes one probably shouldn’t submit a “fully compliant” response…
Posted by BJ under Proposal Guys news, Word play & writing |
The results for the Third Annual Strategic Proposals Cartoon Caption Contest are now in. I imagine you’d like to know which entry won, right?
Well, as this is a blog entry related to an APMP event and not a proposal, I’m going to take license and violate the proposal rule that says you should lead with the headline, in this case the headline being the winning entry.
But just announcing the winner without a bit of background, which I hope would create a bit of dramatic tension, wouldn’t be any fun now would it?
I suspect some of you would like to see the cartoon again. So, here it is –
And the finalists’ entries were –
1. “Can’t your family go to Hawaii without you?” (Anita F.)
2. “Who knew a 14:00 deadline meant 2pm?” (Gregg K.)
3. “Just because the client makes computer chips and not potato chips?” (Cynthia M.)
We received a great many entries. Some of these were as simple as “#3”. Others add a little bit of insight, such as “I can really relate to #2, so I vote for that entry.” And quite a few apparently had the need to share their pain, such as “I have experienced the very same thing as alluded to by #1. Here’s what happened to me. I was working on a proposal and … (and then included very specific details as to this person’s experience.)
We tabulated the entries, had the resulted reviewed by an accounting firm (ok, what I really did was ask bookkeeper check my addition) and then sealed the final result in an envelope (not sure why we did that but it seemed the right thing to do.)
The winner of the Third Annual Strategic Proposals Cartoon Caption Contest is (please feel free to provide your own drum roll here), #2 ““Who knew a 14:00 deadline meant 2pm?” submitted by Greg Kulichik.
Please join me in congratulating Greg and the other finalists (In this case, unlike proposals, all three places have their reward – bragging rights for submitting very clever answers.
Jon and I say thanks to everyone who participated. As has been the case for each of the contests, we received some very clever entries, with Greg’s being voted this year’s cleverest!
Posted by BJ under Proposal Guys news, Word play & writing |
As was the case for the cartoon caption contests* we ran at the annual APMP conferences the past two years, we would have posted the finalists immediately upon returning from the conference. This year I wasn’t able to do so because someone** wasn’t thinking and packed up the responses with the rest of the material from our booth and shipped it back to the Strategic Proposals US offices.
The materials have finally arrived here in our offices and I’m now able to provide the finalist entries and have our readers vote on them.
We received quite a few responses at the conference and, not surprisingly, many of them hit very close to home. Also not surprisingly, many of these (about 20 or so) were related to extensions (I.e. “He didn’t see the notice that they had given us an extension”. John S.) and the turnaround time (“I just asked him to reread the entire thing before we submit it…in 20 minutes.” Tom L.) Another favorite topic was the impending deadline/due date (See one of the finalist entries.) A somewhat surprising topic was pizza (“I just told him they were out of pepperoni.” Submitted by Neil E.). We even had a Disney related entry (see honorable mentions.)
As it is each year, it was tough to come up with the finalists but, after much debate, lobbying and a bit of whining, we were able to come up with an agreed top three entries.
Our two honorable mentions are –
“When did his eyes start bleeding?” (Chris J.)
“He can’t find his Mickey ears.” (Alexandra M-J)
Our three finalists (in alphabetical order of the last name of the submitter) are –
1. “Can’t your family go to Hawaii without you?” (Anita F.)
2. “Who knew a 14:00 deadline meant 2pm?” (Gregg K.)
3. “Just because the client makes computer chips and not potato chips?” (Cynthia M.)
You can cast your vote (one per reader) by sending an e-mail with the subject line “Cartoon Caption Contest” and stating within your mail the number of the entry for which you wish to vote. Please send your mail to bj@strategicproposals.com. We’ll collect votes for one week from the date of this post and then announce the winner.
*We ran our first Cartoon Caption Contest in 2008. This contest is based on and modeled after the long running and very popular cartoon caption contest done by the New Yorker magazine. Entries are submitted, from which three finalists are chosen. The readership then votes for their favorite and a winner is determined based on receiving the largest number of votes.
For each contest, Jon and I come up with an idea for a cartoon and then this is developed and drawn by Mike Parkinson of 24 Hour Company. The cartoon is distributed to conference participants and they then submit their entry (or entries, as participants may submit as many ideas as they wish) and we post it on a board at the conference. Participants at the conference tell us they really enjoy seeing the ideas of their fellow members.
**Okay, I admit it. I was the one to put them in the box. But those supporting me should have known to check to see if I had, yet another, bright idea that wasn’t quite thought through and which needed to be corrected.)
