by Kim Taylor
There’s no question that I’ve become a bit of a grammar and style elitist during my time at Curley & Pynn. I’ll be the first to admit I read books like “Grammar snobs are great big meanies” and “Eats, Shoots and Leaves” for fun. So, yesterday I took to the Internet for a little Twitter PSA:
Replies to my tweet were varied, with most in full support of my rant (hooray!). But, one lonely follower stood up in protest:
After pausing to reflect, I immediately viewed @kirchherr’s Twitter profile to see who I was up against. Alas, I should’ve known; Mr. Kirchherr is a self-proclaimed “Tormentor of AP-style pedants.”
Twitter debate aside, I fervently reiterate my argument in support of AP Style cronies everywhere: to be described as annual, an event has to have happened in at least two successive years. The “intent” for an event to occur in subsequent years isn’t enough, thusly labeling the first event annual vs. first annual … or hey, why not opt for inaugural which removes any confusion or debate.
</rant>.
Taking Aim 
I’m honored, Kim! I would like to say for the record, though, that my tweet was inspired by an honest disagreement with your position, and not a need to gratuitously “torment” you. 🙂
Without rehashing old arguments, I agree with @dtylermeyer, who tweeted on this subject: ” ‘Inaugural’ doesn’t imply an annual event, but ‘first annual’ marks the 1st of an annual series.” In other words, calling an event “inaugural” does not automatically remove “any confusion or debate.”
The appropriate reference would be “first ever.”
All in good fun, Gary. Thanks for reading!
But once the event has established its history, could you proclaim you attendance at the “first annual” event three years ago?
First of all, I love the title of the post. Second, I’m quite entertained by the fact that your rant has a closing tag, but no opening one. (*wink*)
@Ashley … only YOU would notice that. 🙂 Thanks for reading AND commenting (as always!).
[…] First Annual Blog Rant – December 12, 2011 […]