Graph paper. It can evoke so many emotions. I personally feel nostalgia for my school days, but also a touch of panic. Never having been a mathematician, it brings me back to timed math tests and an overwhelming sense of dread.

And, as soon as you open Mathemagics, that’s what you see. A smart design choice in itself, this background automatically puts you in a studious frame of mind. And it’s one you’re going to need. At only $1.99, Mathemagics – Easy Algebra Fast is a breeze to navigate and much more inspiring than a high school algebra textbook.

For this app, content is king. Broken up into Lessons, Practice, and Play, you move through the ranks as you master these concepts:

*Calculate 10% of Any Number

*Calculate 9% of Any Number

*Calculate 11% of Any Number

*Percentages of Numbers Less Than 100

*Percentages of Numbers From 100-999

*Multiply Two Polynomials

*Multiply Two Trinomials

*Multiply Large Polynomials

*Check Polynomial Multiplication

*Basic Algebraic Division

*Intermediate Algebraic Division

*Verify Algebraic Division

*Solve Simultaneous Equations

*Special Case Simultaneous Equations

*Basic Quadratic Equation

*Intermediate Quadratic Equation

*Advanced Quadratic Equation

*Verify Quadratic Equation Roots

At Ballpoint, we’re big fans of the chose-what-to-learn concept, also known as “node” learning. In both of our apps, Word Wit and Phrase Wit, we allow the user to choose the words and phrases that they want to master. This allows people to learn at their own pace, based on their preexisting knowledge. Mathemagics’ success is due, in part, to their utilization of this learning technique.

In the main Lesson menu, you can choose from any lesson listed. So, if you already know how to calculate two polynomials, you can skip to a more advanced section like multiplying large polynomials. This concept also exists within the lessons themselves. Mathemagics’ step-by-step lessons break down each component of the equation. You can view all of the steps in order, or you can start at whichever one you want; for instance, if you already know where to start when it comes to multiplying polynomials and just need to know how to find the final answer, you can skip down to Step 5 or 6. A lot of the final steps also teach you helpful tricks or ways to check your answer. Again, if you already have an idea of you’re doing, skipping steps is definitely be a time-saver!

Another feature that exemplifies personalized learning is the Play component. In addition to choosing what you want to learn, you also get to pick the techniques you want to be tested on. Before the “test” starts, you’re able to checkmark the lessons that you want to be tested on. You’ll also be painfully aware when you haven’t quite mastered Intermediate Algebraic Division because Mathemagics keeps track of how you’re doing as you play.

My only request is the addition of a “work field.” While some questions can be done mentally (calculating 10% of any number), the more difficult concepts cannot. Thus, you can’t work on those while you’re on the go. Despite this, Mathemagics apps are must-have apps for anyone taking algebra, studying for a standardized test, or brushing up on their “lost” math skills.

Between the helpful tips and clever tricks, I can confidently say that this app will help anyone who falls in the mathematically challenged category. Sigh, if I had only had this in high school . . .

Polynomial: an expression of more than two algebraic terms, especially the sum of several terms that contain different powers of the same variable(s).

Bad writing proliferates on the web and in casual digital communications, as you know. A bad side effect of this is that the visual reinforcement of the most common errors threatens to replace the more positive one we used to get from reading edited texts: books, newspapers, magazines, and letters written by a better-educated generation. WordWit was designed as a resource and as a practice tool (learning, quizzing) to re-reinforce the correct versions of the mistakes that litter tweets, posts, comments, chats, texts, and emails. We can all use refreshers. Lots of refreshers.

It’s insidious how it begins. How many times have you seen someone who writes “alot” instead of “a lot”? Seems simple, but the former is never correct. If it becomes correct over time because of ubiquity, then you can use it. Until then, don’t.

Is it “all right” to write “alright“? I’ve seen the latter often enough that I might say yes. But no.

Seems simple, but you shouldn’t have “apiece” of pie. You should have “a piece.” You and your sister get one slice “apiece,” but yours will be smaller if she’s older. I know this from experience. (I’m the older sister.)

Thank goodness for the online dictionary, or the dictionary on the dashboard of my Mac. I never memorized these usages. They right versions just looked right, just like properly spoken English sounds right. I was lucky enough to have been reared well and, on top of that, I received a good education. I over depend on that. Now, after years of looking at wrong, I don’t know anymore. Any more? Seems simple, but I shouldn’t eat any more of that pie.

Ubiquity: The state of existing everywhere. Omnipresence.

We write more than we talk these days. Whose phone rings anymore? It’s more important than ever to find ways to insert personality, levity, friendliness, and humor into our conversational writing.

In formal business and academic writing, we strive for a neutral tone and voice. We want to be matter of fact, simple, direct, and clear. In emails, texts, chats, and even blogs, though, our speaking voice should be allowed to come through. Your readers should be able to “hear” you talking as they read you. “That sounds *just* like Lois!” Ha! I love that.

In casual writing, to people we know — or to audiences who “know” us through a persona crafted through our writing — we’re allowed to use idiosyncratic syntax, creative usage, and unconventional punctuation all in the name of self-expression. While who and what your persona should be is another discussion, it’s one you should consider seriously.

Purists may cringe. We do not. But we draw the line. This writing has rules. Just a different set of rules, that are themselves derived from The Rules. Here are a few thoughts about writing your voice without violating your purpose of clear communications and good intentions:

1. Exclamation points: We’ve extolled the use of exclamation points to lighten writing that is a substitute for talking, especially chats and texts, but also emails between friends. Caution: You don’t want to end every sentence with an exclamation point. You don’t really talk that way — do you?

2. Capitals, asterisks, italics, bolding. These are all ways to stress words and add inflection, giving music to the written voice. Asterisks are an *alternate* way to indicate italics. They’re jaunty and sparkly on the page. Bolding is a little more sophisticated, and may indicate an important word rather than a vocal stress. (We use colored bolded words to give our posts skim-ability, and to highlight key take-aways.) Caution: Don’t overuse caps. ONE word, all caps, isn’t shouting. A whole paragraph of ALL CAPS is.

3. Ellipses and em dashes: Daily Writing Tips has written an excellent and thorough post about when and how to use the ellipsis. It’s not as straightforward as you’d imagine. There are Rules. Caution: They can be annoying distractions in a block of text where they willy-nilly replace plain old periods. I have a friend who writes a weekly synopsis of the financial markets using ellipses instead of periods, in one long-ass paragraph with no breaks. It’s torture to read. Sad, because other than the horrible formatting, the content is brilliant. Em dashes prepare the reader for an interruption in thought, an aside. That suits my personal speaking style since I’m always digressing. I’m an em dash girl. Ellipses are for things you’re leaving out . . . . and according to DWT, they should be written as periods with spaces on either side.

4. Quotes: Obviously, if you’re quoting another person or source, you’d use quotation marks. In conversational writing, quotation marks can also evoke emphasis, irony, or sarcasm much in the same the way you’d use “air quotes” in person. There. I just did it.

5. Sentence length: Some people actually speak in full long sentences, calling on a broad vocabulary. When they write the same way, they’re still writing their voice. On the other end of the spectrum is another blog characterized by short, declarative sentences. Where, in someone else’s writing voice, a comma might suffice between connected thoughts, periods better mimic the blogger’s blunt, funny, and distinctive speaking style.

6. Idiosyncratic syntax: I like shocking friends and readers who expect me to be proper and correct. I use “funner” instead of “more fun”; I swear (OK, that doesn’t surprise many people); I write run-on sentences that sound like me when I’m excited. I. Write. Like. This. To make a point. To indicate rhythm and tempo. I write incomplete sentences. I make up words. Writing that’s more like a play script than prose. Yeah. That’s the ticket.

7. Un-intended mistakes: Casual though conversational writing may be, avoid unintended mistakes. As with more formal writing, it erodes the confidence your readers have in your being intentionally goofy or flip, and in their trust that what you say has been carefully thought out, even in the most hasty (≠ careless) of notes. Don’t things still scoot under the radar? Sure. We can all be forgiven occasional transgressions. But sloppy writing is tedious for readers, and tedious is the last thing you want to be known as.

What are some of your personal idiosyncrasies that identify your speaking voice when writing? Favorite tics?

Ellipsis: The omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues; a set of dots indicating such an omission.

It is currently fashionable to drop any comma that has a structural rule attached to it but which isn’t expressly needed to readily understand a sentence. In the previous sentence, for example, I could have put a comma after the first clause and before the coordinating conjunction “but.” (I chose not to since both parts of the sentence comprise a unified thought, not separate thoughts conjoined.) But, the commas before and after “for example” and the one in this sentence after “But” help with both the rhythm and meaning of their respective sentences. (I’ve highlighted the respective commas in red.)

In their zeal to eradicate cluttering commas, rebellious text-makers can lose meaning and sense. The opposite occurs when commas are inserted when the text-maker hears a pause in their head that’s not structurally required for sense-making, as in this real-life sentence:

The very questions I used to hate on a daily basis, are the ones I miss the most.

The comma after “basis” isn’t needed according to any rule, nor is the sentence so long that a natural pause in the rhythm cries out for a respite comma.

So, how do you know when to be fashionably restrained in your comma count, and how do you know when to keep them in? Follow the rules. Only if you’re confident of the rules and know a dropped comma won’t trip up your average reader should you break them.

If commas confuse you, and if you’re publishing what you’re writing, hand your writing to a proofreader. (We do!) Eventually, you’ll learn from your editor. And eventually, Ballpoint will invent a game for commas — and you’ll never have to worry again.

Misspelled words happen. They just do. In fact, I recently misspelled “pronunciation” as “pronounciation” in the title of a work email chain that went just about everywhere. Considering the fact that I work for Ballpoint, that mistake ranks pretty high on the embarrassing scale.

Now that I’ve admitted my own spelling failings, I can proceed to tell you about — and relish in — “Top 10 Most Unforgivable Twitter Spelling Mistakes” by Matt Stopera of BuzzFeed. Think of this as a pre-weekend gift from me to you.

The 10 Most Unforgivable Misspellings:

1. “Cologne” misspelt as ➞ “Colon”
2. “Ambiance” ➞“Umbeyonce” (I may never recover from this one.)
3. “Granted” ➞ “Granite”
4. “College” ➞ “Collage”
5. “Manners” ➞ “Manors”
6. “Vicariously” ➞ “Bicuriously”
7. “Genius” ➞ “Genious”
8. “Asshole” ➞ “Asswhole”
9. “Hypocrites” ➞ ”Hippocrates”
10.  “Angel” ➞ “Angle”

If you thought those were good (you know, in a bad way), wait until you’ve seen them used in context. While I do think that that these Twitter handles should have been blurred out in the article, I still jollily read and laughed at these silly mistakes. Oh how I wish I could send all of these people a free copy of Word Wit. Unfortunately, my good “manors” prevent me from calling them out and doing so.

As a self-admitted Twitter addict, I see terrible misspellings all of the time. When I notice a Tweep repeatedly making a mistake and they’re one of my “best” Twitter friends, I often wonder whether or not I should say something. I want to help them out, but I also don’t want to come across as a cocky “genious,” or worse, a straight-up “asswhole.”

What do you think? Should you tell an Internet friend that their poor twelling (spelling on Twitter) may bring about their inclusion in an article like BuzzFeed’s, or should you just giggle to yourself and ignore it? “Way” in.

Hippocrates: The famous Greek physician who is often regarded as the “Father of Medicine.” While he often gets credit for the Hippocratic oath, he is not the author. What else isn’t he? The correct spelling of “hypocrites.”

Take notes. The only way to understand the marvels of New Twitter (vs. “Guess-What-I-Had-For-Lunch” and “I’m-Watching-TV-Now!” Old Twitter) is to get back into your Twitter account and make it relevant to yourself. Your first order of business is finding interesting Twitter people, AKA “Tweeps,” to follow, and then getting some of those Tweeps to follow you back. Twitter is a communications platform more than a social network, and, as we’ve remarked before, you can follow and interact with anyone you like. You don’t have to know them, nor they you. It’s ideal is not to have too big a mismatch between your following and follower numbers.

So, who do you want to follow? We would recommend a mix of accounts to get the most from your experience: Big News (CNN, WSJ), niche news, special interests (Grateful Dead, cycling, literature), celebrities and comedians, and work-related feeds are just a few categories to get you started. When it comes to the Average Joe, here are the three best ways to find followers you’re compatible with:

1. See who your friends or leaders in particular areas of interest follow. Pick a Tweep who represents your interest, someone who you really admire, who has clickable links, fun comments, or is having interesting conversations with others.

• When you click on their picture or their name, a small version of their profile will come up.
•  Then click either their name or their picture again. Now you should be on their profile and you should be able to see all of their tweets.
• To see who they are following, click on the middle number that says “following.” Here you can see a summary of everyone that person is following with brief descriptions, all in one place.
• As you read through them, just click on the ones you find interesting. You’ll see a small version again with the most recent three tweets. If you like them, then click follow.

2. You know how you have different kinds of friends in your real life? Well, Twitter is no different. The exception is that you can use “lists” to categorize them on Twitter.

• To see what kinds of lists your Tweeps have (some might not have any), click on their profile.
• Click “Lists” from the menu on the left-hand side  You’ll automatically see the lists that they’ve subscribed to. Either they have created those lists, or they follow someone else’s lists.
•  Scroll through and click on the ones whose titles and descriptions interest you. Just like in the above method, pick some of the people listed and follow them if you like their tweets. You can also just follow the whole list.

3. Use hashtags to find like-minded people. Hashtags categorize tweets by keyword, click here to learn more. Already acquainted with hashtags? Keep reading.

• Locate the search bar at the top of your profile page.
• Type in # followed by something you’re interested in (no spaces). Some examples: #books, #circuittraining, #SanFran.
• You’ll automatically see the “top” tweets (AKA the most popular tweets) that contain that hashtag. If you want to see all of the tweets that showcase that hashtag, devoid of popularity, click “all” (to the right of “top”) next to the word “tweets.”
• When you see a tweet that speaks to you, click on that person’s name or picture, check out all of their tweets, and decide whether or not they are worthy of your follow.

Beware, once again, of piling up too many follows. If you’re not followed back and your totals are lopsided, you’ll want to go back and eliminate accounts. You can “List” an account without following it, though. When you click on your List (I do this with big news outlets that will never follow me back), you can see all the tweets in that category.

Happy following!

#FollowFriday is the hash-tagged Twitter convention where Tweeps recommend other Tweeps they recommend you follow. It’s a veritable love fest. There are so many great language, writing, grammar, and word accounts we follow, we thought we’d take #FollowFriday’s lead and clue you in to our favorites.

To play #FridayFollow, you list the names accounts you recommend by listing their Twitter IDs preceded by the @ sign (e.g., @Call_Me_Bookish, @BallpointNews, @BallpointApps, or @NOMDEPLUME) and then add the hashtag, #FridayFollow. The @ sign links to the account when clicked on, and the # sign sorts the FridayFollow tweets all in one place.

We’re word nerds. So for our first #FridayFollow, we thought we’d begin with our perennially loved #WOTD (word of the day) accounts on Twitter. It’s fun to silently gloat when you already know what the word means. It’s fun to learn a new word to add to your already impressive vocabulary. It’s even fun to learn the bizarre ones that you’ll probably never, ever use. Oh well, they amused you for the moment.

The Ballpoint Revue Words of the Day (at the end of our blog posts and @BallpointNews) are usually intended to make practical additions to your vocabulary, or clarify words you  probably already know but where you might benefit from sharpening your grasp of its meaning.

So here’s our hit parade of

@Artwiculate. Artwiculate is a word-of-the-day game that’s played on Twitter. Yes, you read that correctly! “To play, just use today’s word in context in one of your tweets. That’s it. Your tweet will appear here where people can tell you if they like it. You’ll get points if they like it or retweet it.” Let’s get this straight, you learn a new word, use it in 140 characters, and then pass judgement on your wordy peers? Sign us up.

@BryanAGarner. Anglophiles, we would tell you that you’d love Bryan, but you probably already know who he is: the author of Garner’s Modern American Usage, a book we’ve espoused on our very own blog. Bryan’s word-of-the-day tweets offer something different. Separated into Garner’s word of the day and Garner’s word of the day for law, these daily tweets are sure to stump the most wordy (or is it, worthy?) of us.

@MerriamWebster. A classic. We like Merriam Webster’s daily word choices because they vary. Some, like spiel, are super easy while others like, bon vivant, deliciously delve into foreign quarters. If you’re looking for a mix of elementary, formidable, and foreign words, they’re your #WOTD account.

@Urbandaily. Do you know what a Splenda Daddy is? No, we didn’t think so. According to urbandictionary, he’s “a man who strives to be a Sugar Daddy but just doesn’t have the funds to pull it off.” See, don’t you feel better now that you’re all caught up in the slang department? How did you survive all of these years without (a) Splenda Daddy?

@Wordnik. Another interactive word of the day account! Craft a sentence using Wordnik’s daily word and tweet it. The Wordnik team will comb through the entries, pick their favorites, and post these perfect tweets on their blog. Let your wordy prowess win you some recognition! Even if your entry isn’t one of the chosen tweets, the winning sentences are always a blast to read.

Espouse: adopt or support (a cause, a belief, a dictionary, or a way of life). From late Middle English, in the sense of “take as a spouse.”

We can’t help but smile when we see these deprecating brunettes and redheads who tell dumb blond jokes use the incorrect form of the word. Geez, what a bunch of blonds! We know what you’re thinking: “Can’t ‘blond’ and ‘blonde’ be used interchangeably?”

Alas, no, airheads. Lest you look the fool while making foolish jokes, read on.

“Blond” as an adjective is more commonly spelled without the “e” and can be used for describing either males or females. However, when “blonde” is a noun standing in for a girl or woman who sports that hair color, blonde, the feminine version of the French adjective (from whom we Yanks appropriated the word), is correct. Dumb blond jokes about men are gaining traction (we are for equal mockery here at Ballpoint), in which case you’d use the masculine form, blond.

The utter stupidity of making blond jokes in general? Now that’s another post.

Deprecating: Expressing disapproval of.

When to hyphenate words is one of those pesky grammar things I always seem to have trouble with — for example, your use of “time-consuming” in your presentation.

Ellen

Dear Ellen,

Busted! Your letter has given me the opportunity, like all of our Letters from the Grammarverse, to explore this topic further and find myself enlightened, and (gasp!) corrected. With my thanks, allow me to share my findings.

Hyphenating two or more adjectives when they are ahead of the modified noun and when they function as a single idea — it was a time-consuming course — makes for an unambiguous interpretation. However, in my presentation, the phrase was “courses that are time consuming,” and hyphenation wasn’t unnecessary. I’ll de-hyphenate.

Even if I had written “time consuming courses,” however, it isn’t likely that someone would confuse whether “time” was modifying “consuming” or “courses.” On the other hand, in the phrase “English language learners,” without a hyphen between English and language, the reader could be confused as to whether the writer is referring to language learners who are English, or learners of the English language. I’d have to re-hyphenate that.

When we expand the category of compound words beyond compound adjectives and adverbs, however, Ellen’s right that they are pesky. Maybe I can un-confuse us both.

When two or more words function as a single unit of meaning, they may be written as:

• Closed compounds, two words that are expressed a single idea (freestanding, pawnbroker, copywriter)
• Hyphenated compounds for expressions where words have become linked by usage to express one idea (mother-in-law, merry-go-round, re-sign as opposed to resign)
• Open compounds for expressions that are so well known that there is no room for ambiguity (chocolate chip cookies, high school, decision making)

How do you know when an expression or phrase is supposed to by hyphenated, open, or close? Look them up. Many of them are found in the dictionary and are not subject to interpretation, judgment, or whim.

Still, some compounds are subjective or in flux, as evidenced by contradictory dictionary entries and current usage. Here are two examples of hyphenated words in flux.

Co-worker/coworker: The self-described Coworking movement is making single a compound word that has remained hyphenated in proper writing to avoid the “cow” blend.

Care giving/caregiving, never hyphenated, has properly been two words. But during all my caregiving years, I preferred the closed compound as an expression of an increasingly recognized full-time occupation (lawmaker, wrongdoer), and it has now become an acceptable alternative that passes the spellcheck police.)

There are no decisive rules, and memorization would be tedious and painful (but not impossible). I looked up all of the compound words writing this post. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary is a frequent recommended source to settle hyphenation questions. In a pinch, follow this maxim: if it looks wrong, hyphenate it.

If you want to learn more or memorize some:

• This list of hyphenation guidelines is pretty helpful.
• Take a quiz by Daily Writing Tips to test your hyphen knowledge, it’s quite instructional.

Let’s have some fun together. Taking this example — dirty-movie theater vs. dirty movie-theater — send us some funny compound words that could go both ways, and maybe embarrassingly so if not for a well-placed hyphen.

Maxim: A short, pithy statement expressing a general truth or rule of conduct. ORIGIN: from late Middle English (denoting an axiom) derived from the medieval Latin (propositio) maxima, ‘largest or most important (proposition).’

The umlaut in German is the double-dot diacritical over vowels that want to be pronounced like you’re being squeezed around the throat and grabbed by the — well, you get what I mean. The sound is über hard for Americans to make. You will see umlauts over a single vowel or over the first in a pair of vowels, or diphthong. The diaeresis is the same figure, but in English it occurs over the second in a pair of vowels, indicating the speaker is to pronounce the two vowels separately, in two syllables: coöperate, reëlect, naïve.

Why we continue to use diaereses in some diphthongs and not others (poem, reignite) is the subject of this Grammarphobia post which contains a more extensive explanation and history on these diacritics (phonetic guides).

Autocorrect doesn’t add the diaeresis, so one has to do some word-processing back flips to get one into your text. While they’re nice for reading aloud, we don’t get tripped up by the lack of diaereses in texts we read. I think it’s nice that The New Yorker does, though. And I think the policy meeting that abolishes them is as likely as changing funny state laws. (E.g. In Miami, it is illegal for a man to wear any kind of strapless gown.) Why bother?

Diacritic, or Diacritical: a mark or sign serving to indicate different pronunciations of a letter above or below which it is written. Besides the diaeresis and the umlaut, here are the most familiar diacritical marks, along with words they may appear with: the acute accent (“blasé”), the grave accent (“learnèd”), the circumflex (“bête noire”), the cedilla (“façade”), and the tilde (“señor”).