Critiquing my e-mail

[Merry Mrs Martin]

Higher instead of hire is NOT a "typo."  A typographical error involves an error introduced in the typing of the word by omitting, adding, or replacing a letter - if, say, the OP had typed ire or hirt or hipre instead of hire.  Higher instead of hire is simply a mistake - confusion of homonyms.

Semantics and, quite frankly, nitpicking. It's common in slang nowadays to use both meanings wrapped up in a neat little package called "typo."

I don't think it is just  semantics.....I would not take an issue with a quick responce Email which included "yess" for example (I'm not hiring an editor though) but a homonym switch would give me pause.  I'm not sure which error OP made in the email ,if the email chain was sent to her intentionally or how it was worded any of those things might have been rude.  Disqualifying an editor for an error isn't rude.

[Luci45]

I learned in a course that Shakespeare didn't even spell his own name the same way all of the time.

Really?! That's funny. How else did he spell it?

www.shakespeareauthorship.com/name1.html

Try that link for some more details. It still doesn't say which HE used himself/

This one at least says that he may have spelled his name differently. (I had been told 6 different ways, but never really saw them. It was just the word of my professor at the time.)

www.shakespeare-online.com/biography/shakespearename.html

[greencat]

Spelling wasn't standardized in Shakespeare's era.  The first English dictionary wasn't published until a few years before his death.

[wolfie]

Spelling wasn't standardized in Shakespeare's era.  The first English dictionary wasn't published until a few years before his death.

You would think that you would pick one way to spell your name and then stick with it.

[Frostblooded]

Higher instead of hire is NOT a "typo."  A typographical error involves an error introduced in the typing of the word by omitting, adding, or replacing a letter - if, say, the OP had typed ire or hirt or hipre instead of hire.  Higher instead of hire is simply a mistake - confusion of homonyms.

Semantics and, quite frankly, nitpicking. It's common in slang nowadays to use both meanings wrapped up in a neat little package called "typo."

I don't think it is just  semantics.....I would not take an issue with a quick responce Email which included "yess" for example (I'm not hiring an editor though) but a homonym switch would give me pause.  I'm not sure which error OP made in the email ,if the email chain was sent to her intentionally or how it was worded any of those things might have been rude.  Disqualifying an editor for an error isn't rude.

I was not speaking of the email. I was speaking of the OP's post.

Higher instead of hire is NOT a "typo."  A typographical error involves an error introduced in the typing of the word by omitting, adding, or replacing a letter - if, say, the OP had typed ire or hirt or hipre instead of hire.  Higher instead of hire is simply a mistake - confusion of homonyms.

Thank you--this is what I've been wanting to say. This is a serious problem for someone who will do editing. It's far more serious than a true typo.

And it may be nitpicking, and semantics, but given that we're talking about someone who applied for a job that involves editing, it is important to make the distinction. The OP has at least two usage errors that will completely shut her out from a job that involves editing. And if she wants to fix those errors, she'll need a different approach from fixing a typo.

It is an important distinction for the HR officer, not for the responses in this thread.  The fact than an error was made in the application, everyone agrees was bad.  My colloquial shorthand to apply 'typo' to both spelling and other grammatical errors is hardly relevant.

What this poster says is correct.

[jaxsue]

You would think that you would pick one way to spell your name and then stick with it.

But that would have taken all the fun out of my geneology research! 

Argh! Having done tons of family research, I've found so many variations of names it's ridiculous. 

[hollasa]

The problem I have is that the HR person I started an e-mail chain with critiqued one of my e-mails. It was not a cover letter e-mail, just a response. I know its an editing position. On the other hand its an e-mail, and if this person did not want to higher me because of that I am sure there is a better way to respond. Am I right or is this person right?

Doesn't this also depend on the manner of critique?

If the response is "You idiot, why on earth would we want to hire someone who uses Comic Sans on her emails", or something like that, I can see an issue.

If, however, the person doing the hiring says "you may wish to note when you apply for future positions elsewhere that spelling and grammar count, when applying for editing positions" then that is valid and helpful feedback.

Criticism is good when it is constructive. The traditional response has been not to respond at all - this has to be better!

[artk2002]

Spelling wasn't standardized in Shakespeare's era.  The first English dictionary wasn't published until a few years before his death.

I highly recommend The Fight for English -- How language pundits ate, shot, and left by David Crystal. A very good summary of the history of the English language and the many, many efforts to standardize it. Yes, he does get a few digs in at Lynn Truss.