As we all go along, our understanding of the English language grows, and as you understand the language more, you begin to truly understand the unorganized, inconsistent, and rather haphazard rules that make the English language the English language.
Every so often, the grammar and stylization books come out with a new version. The University of Oxford, for example, provides the Oxford standard. There is also Cornell's Elements of Style. Then, there is the Modern Language Association (MLA) Style Manual. This doesn't even mention the likes of dictionaries like Webster, which add words on a regular basis.
The point is that the English language is in a state of constant evolution and change. A quick science lesson for you, when people think of evolution, they seem to think of it as a means of growing more efficient, better, and more complicated. This isn't the truth at all. Evolution is about changing into something that fits the environment the best, where it be simpler, better, or even dumber. English is constantly evolving, not to an ideal state, but to fit the needs of the current generation.
This is why I always find it laughable when previous generations condemn new generations for the ways they speak. You're not speaking English! What I spoke was English! Your new words are strange and confuse me. LOL. The only point of English is so we communicate. How we communicate informs English. If every teenager spoke a certain way, refusing to acknowledge it undermines the point of having a language.
Point being, the longer you immerse yourself in English, the more you begin to realize that grammar and spelling are not written in stone. English is not only evolving, but the rules keep changing too. New words are created every day, and sometimes old rules get replaced with new rules. If you've ever heard a single line of Shakespeare, you'd understand exactly how much our language has evolved over the years.
Oh, and by the way, anyone who thinks Shakespeare was some refined literary genius... you probably should understand that his plays at the time he wrote them were rather simple, crass, and written for a general audience. They lasted through the test of time exactly because they catered to the lowest common denominator. There are numerable penis jokes in his work. The modern equivalent was less Hemingway and more JK Rowling.
That said, I've already written chapters explaining how, as an author, there is only two things holding you back from writing. Those are what the public will understand, and what your publisher will accept. Grammar, spelling, rules... well, they are more like guidelines, really. They can be ignored at a moment's notice. As long as you can convey the scene so your readers understand it and want to read more... nothing else matters.
We all learn the same English, so English with decent grammar is usually the English most accessible to all of your readers. You should always write toward the crowd you're trying to speak to. If you want your work read by teens, write like a teen. If you want your work read by professionals, you need to write like a professional.
Part of the reason this very book is so accessible is because I don't write like a college professor with an English degree. I write like the clueless and ignorant individual I am, and I think that it works well for a lot of you.
I've previously written the chapter 'Write whatever you want', and genuinely already covered this concept. However, it really is important, especially when you reach the final drafts of a novel, so I wanted to cover it one more time in a more specific way. I wanted to point out some things in English that don't have a clearly defined answer.
To be clear, every standard has their take on this. In a way, you could say that a decision has been ruled. However, that decision isn't always followed, and there are plenty of people who don't follow the standards. As I pointed out, when someone doesn't follow a standard, the answer isn't always for people to be educated. Sometimes, it's the rules that need to change. Language was built for people to communicate, not the other way around. Just because what you write isn't grammatical, doesn't mean those rules might not change and suddenly its everyone else who is wrong.
In the words of Abraham Simpson: "I used to be with 'it', but then they changed what 'it' was. Now what I'm with isn't 'it' anymore and what's 'it' seems weird and scary. It'll happen to you!"
That said, let's talk about the moon. Oh, I'm sorry, the Moon. Eh? Which is it? The other day I had a lengthy discussion with my editor about this very subject. He was quick to declare it is the Moon, and you need to call it the Moon. Me, being the rebel that I am, wasn't so convinced.
You can go online and debate this all night.
The Moon is the proper name of that big ball that comes out in the sky at night, so it should be capitalized.
No, it isn't. The moon has many names. Luna, Lune, Mond, Selene... but moon is WHAT the moon is, not its proper name, it should be lowercase.
What are you saying? The Moon NEEDS to be uppercase. This differentiates it from the moons of other planets. Only our moon is the Moon.
Shut up, idiot. When in writing are you going to refer to the moon and NOT be talking about our moon? Unless you write scifi or science literature, this differentiation isn't necessary, and even when it is, if a reader doesn't understand which moon they are talking about, there are issues beyond such a clarification. Besides, in a science fiction story, if you were on a foreign planet with a single moon, wouldn't you call it 'the moon' and not its name... thus by your logic it should be capitalized, otherwise making your reason for differentiating it pointless.
Whatever, the Moon is more mainstream accepted. I looked it up on the internet.
Uh... don't you mean the Internet?
...
...
This isn't the only grammatical battle you can discuss.
"How are you?" she asked.
"How are you?" She asked.
A question mark by very nature calls for a full stop. This is also why some people are against the interrobang (!?). However, in dialogue, a dialogue tag that modifies or informs the dialogue should be within the same sentence, connected by a coma. Thus... the question mark can act like a coma in this situation. Or can it?
Officially, the style guides insist that ? and ! can function as comas, despite this actually makes no sense grammatically. Even I originally had this wrong when I first wrote my chapter on dialogue back in the day. Even when someone corrected me, I stubbornly didn't want to concede this point, and you can probably tell that in writing this chapter, I still haven't conceded all the way.
I think text looks better with a capital letter rather than a lowercase.
"What?" She asked.
This just looks better to me than the correct form...
"What?" she asked.
And, as long as I remained consistent in my editing, 90% of readers would never notice this mistake, nor would they care. This isn't something that reduces readability, or in some way hinders a reader from understanding what you meant. In a way, whether you put this or not is purely up to choice, and depends on which rule you care more about, the idea that the marks are terminal stops, or the idea that a dialogue tag should be in the same sentence as the dialogue to be properly considered a dialogue tag.
If you're publishing your work, you're not beholden to any particular style guide. You may experience a few snobs who have their own personal opinions about it. If you're putting your work against English professors, I can see you needing to differ to their desires, and when you're trying to publish with a publisher you need to do it the way they want it. However, when it comes to writing for your fans, it really depends on your fans. If they are a bunch of snobs, then maybe a change is in order. If they would never notice, then ultimately the choice is up to you.
When I was in a Graduate level writing course for my science writing, I had a teacher who insisted that you need to remove passive voice. This is actually a common sentiment in writing. You should always aim for active voice. Passive voice makes a work feel bottled down and more difficult to follow. I'm not sure if I necessarily agree with this, but one thing my teacher imparted on us really stuck with me.
When writing your science techniques, she stated that you should write in active voice. Instead of saying 'the animals were dissected' you should say 'We dissected the animals." Acting like they were magically experimented on by a mysterious nonexistent entity doesn't fit with the clear and concise way science papers are written. Makes sense, right?
In practice, there are NO scientists that write this way. Even though this teacher insisted things should be written in active voice, everyone writes scientific protocol in passive voice. "The cells were extracted and then digested in lysis buffer..." That's just the way it is done. In this case, what is grammatically 'correct' is forgone to just follow what is popular and expected.
The reason she does this is because when teaching the next generation, she hopes to change people's sentiment. She imagines a day where stylistically scientists finally switch to active voice. All it would take is enough of her students becoming inspired and then getting into positions as journal editors while pushing their standard, and such a thing could become a reality. That's who change happens.
I wrote a chapter listing off all of my dialogue tags, and in it I mention that there are descriptive beats that are also labeled as dialogue tags. The option is seemingly up to the user. To anyone who skipped that chapter or needs a refresher, a dialogue tag exists in the same sentence as the dialogue and serves to modify the dialogue and how it is spoken. A descriptive beat is something that describes and action taken immediately before, after, or during said dialogue.
"I like you," she said.
Versus.
"I like you." She pursed her lips.
There are various words that can function as both. Moan, bawl, cry, grunt... to name a few.
"What do you want?" She grunted.
"What do you want?" she grunted.
Well, which is it? This is another case where the choice is seemingly up to the writer. There is a difference between the two sentences. There is a different thing happening. In the first sentence, she's asking a question, and then giving a grunt... like "What do you want? Grunt!" where the second actually has her grunting every word. Some might be asking... 'how do you even grunt an entire sentence like that?' To that... all I can say is Tim Allen, that's how.
You may have a strong opinion one way or another on this, or any of the other points I brought up. The point I'm trying to make is that such rules are up for debate, and you can debate them. Ultimately, the choice is going to be up to the publisher and yourself. Wattpad will publish just about anything. They don't have a standard for writing to put out your work. Therefore, it's really between you and your audience how you write.
There are other examples of things that are up for debate. Interrobangs, em dash, the oxford comma: Depending on who your publisher is and who the writer is, you may find conflicting viewpoints about all of these things. Your decision on these issues may evolve with time. What you feel one day might switch the next day. The only really important thing is to remain consistent in your own work, and be flexible enough to be willing to change if you find your opinion conflicting with your publisher's desires.
Who knows? Maybe one day the hill you stand on becomes the new standard, just don't die on it.
Hopefully, that gave you a bit more perspective on the chapter, "Write Whatever you Want" and the importance of understanding what you're doing, and why you're doing it. Good Luck and Happy Writing.