Grammer query, refering to a quoted word that is foriegn.

LewieP

I am doing a paper for organisational behaviour, and have come across a grammar query.

I have this sentence to write -

For these firms “lean organizations may be more effective” Lin and Hui (1999), than alternatives, in this case, mass organisation, and the benefits brought by lean organisation, teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste, will be useful for adapting to the wider market environment.

Now, the quote I am using is an american author, who spells it "organization", when refering to the quote I have assumed that I should use the English spelling "organisation" but was not 100%.

Also, is there a better way of me inserting the list "teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste" it feels wrong with commas, but I don't know the alternative.

Thanks.

Szechuanosaurus

Be all snobbish and put (sic) after the wrong spelling.

I think your commas are all fucked up

For these firms “lean organizations (sic) may be more effective” Lin and Hui (1999) than alternatives. In this case mass organisation, and the benefits brought by lean organisation (teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste), will be useful for adapting to the wider market environment.

There. Now it doesn't read like you're asphyxiating.

Aegis

Personally I'd write the word how it appeared, and not try and correct it. I believe the convention of [sic] is used after words that you do correct that you were unsure about, but I'm not 100% on that.

For the sentence, I'd change it to (ignore the [] around the citation):

For these firms "lean organizations may be more effective" [Lin and Hui (1999)] than alternatives. In this case mass organization (and the benefits brought by lean organization), teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment, and little waste will be useful for adapting to the wider market environment.

Thanatos

LewieP wrote: »

I am doing a paper for organisational behaviour, and have come across a grammar query.

I have this sentence to write -

For these firms “lean organizations may be more effective” Lin and Hui (1999), than alternatives, in this case, mass organisation, and the benefits brought by lean organisation, teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste, will be useful for adapting to the wider market environment.

Now, the quote I am using is an american author, who spells it "organization", when refering to the quote I have assumed that I should use the English spelling "organisation" but was not 100%.

Also, is there a better way of me inserting the list "teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste" it feels wrong with commas, but I don't know the alternative.

Thanks.

Quotes should be exact quotes. You could add "(sic)" to the end to indicate it was the spelling in the original, but in the case of American versus British spelling, it's really not necessary.

Stick a period after "alternatives," remove the commas after "mass organisation," "lean organisation," and "waste," and add a dash after "lean organisation" and "waste."

Should look like this:

For these firms “lean organizations may be more effective” Lin and Hui (1999), than alternatives. In this case, mass organisation and the benefits brought by lean organisation--teamwork, responding quickly to a changing work environment and little waste--will be useful for adapting to the wider market environment.

Erandus

If you were typing up a verbal quote, you would use your native spelling. Since you're quoting something someone else wrote, leave it in it's original form. Both spellings are acceptable so no need for the (sic) thing.

Szechuanosaurus

I was joking about the (sic) thing. The punctuation though, either mine or Than reads more fluidly.

LewieP

Thanks guys, that looks much better.

Resolved!

Thanatos

Szechuanosaurus wrote: »

I was joking about the (sic) thing. The punctuation though, either mine or Than reads more fluidly.

Yeah, I generally have a pro-dash bias versus parentheses (which I think get overused). Basically, which one you choose depends on how relevant/how much emphasis you want to put on the words inside. Dashes are more emphasis, less tangential, parentheses are less emphasis, more tangential.

LewieP

Wait, now I am using the quote

“communication breakdown refers to the intra-organizational situation in which members cannot freely communicate with each other” Lin and Hui (1999).

Anyone have any suggestions to get Led Zeppelin out of my head? I keep wanting to write "it's always the same"...

Willeth

Isn't 'sic' usually contained within [brackets] and not (parentheses)?

Thanatos

Willeth wrote: »

Isn't 'sic' usually contained within [brackets] and not (parentheses)?

Either way is correct.

Seattle Thread

Aegis wrote: »

I believe the convention of [sic] is used after words that you do correct that you were unsure about, but I'm not 100% on that.

It's the opposite. I]sic[/I after a word means that the incorrect grammar or spelling was present in the source material, and it's being reprinted as such... "as such" being one of sic's translations.

grendel824_

You can start by fixing the atrocious spelling in your title, although keeping things like "grammEr," "refer(r)ing," and "forIEgn" is comedy gold...

LewieP

Firefox's built in spell check for some reason doesn't work for titles...

Ultimanecat

Direct quotations are best, but if you are having problems fitting a quotation into a sentence naturally, you can paraphrase it i.e. reword it while retaining the SAME meaning and not using quotation marks. Alternatively, you can directly replace parts of a quotation with your own writing by using brackets to indicate rewritten areas; generally this is used to make quotations grammatically correct in the context of a larger sentence.

Finally, you can always omit a part of a quotation with an ellipsis i.e. "...".