Erin Brenner at the Writing Resource asks: “Does spelling still matter?”

It does. It matters a lot.

Some people think worrying about spelling and grammar is anal and backward. They are wrong.

There are two non-anal reasons why spelling and grammar are important and will remain important for as long as people still read printed words:

First: Well-written, properly spelt (I’m British, this is allowable), grammatically correct English is unambiguous.

Poorly written English is more open to misinterpretation.

If being understood is important, then worry about spelling and grammar.

Second: Well-written text flows, it’s a pleasure to read. It sends readers a message about your professionalism and wisdom. It is credible.

Poorly-written English jerks around, causes readers to stumble, they may not realise why this sets off alarm bells in their heads, but it does.

Too much poor English and they’ll question the message. This may not happen on a conscious level. It may not happen with all readers. It will happen enough for it to matter.

Writing about the UK election debates for the New Scientist Raj Persaud and James W. Pennebaker say:

Over the last 10 years, more than a dozen studies have analysed the language of honesty and deception. People are more likely to be telling the truth if:

• their sentences are longer and more complex;
• they use I-words more (e.g. "I", "me", "my");
• they use bigger words;
• they make more references to time and motion, and
• they use more self-reflective words such as "realise", "understand", and "think".

The best markers of deception are "would-should-could" verbs, positive emotion words, and you-words.

I wonder if this applies to writing and whether savvy (or cynical) writers can use this information to manipulate readers.

Probably not. After all, Persaud and Pennebaker finish saying: "Our approach is more accurate than flipping a coin but far from 100 per cent accurate".

Americans use more commas than the British*.

You often find long, asthmatic, comma-packed sentences in American newspapers. They don't make for easy reading.

I prefer using plenty of full stops — periods to Americans — and sparing the comma. I only use commas where they aid understanding. Writers often underrate the comma's use as an aid to sense.

It can be hard keeping track of who does what to whom in long, comma-laden sentences. Breaking sentences into smaller units of meaning makes your writing easier to follow.

Some Americans put commas between all clauses and sub-clauses. British-trained writers avoid them between short clauses at the start of sentences.

Americans use commas before and at the end of a sequence of items. In Britain the final comma only gets used when one of the sequence items includes an and.

Some experts report American writers are slowly moving towards British patterns and commas are now less common on both sides of the Atlantic.

When training younger journalists, I used to joke about Americans using lots more commas than the Brits because they are so much richer and can afford the extra ink.

*Australians and New Zealanders follow the British pattern.

After the Deadline helps tidy your writing. It checks spellings and offers advice on grammar and usage.

Some of its advice is interesting. For example, the software flags motivation as a cliché.

While a lot of writing about motivation is clichéd, I don't think the word is a cliché when used in a business or management context.

Or am I wrong?

It’s hard to get away without using jargon when you write about technical subjects. Some ideas are easier to explain that way.

But only use technical jargon in context.

Otherwise there’s no excuse for indulging in the robot-speak used by corporations and government departments.

Jargon doesn’t make you look smarter. It tells your readers you’re a pompous wind-bag.

And jargon makes your words, and your meaning, harder to understand.

Remember, not every reader is a native English speaker.

Some of my pet hates:

• Ongoing – and ongoing situation is worse.
• Going forward – if you mean in the future say so.
• Ground rules.
• Upturn.
• Outcome is a particularly nasty piece of political and bureaucratic jargon for result.
• Currently.

If you find jargon in my writing please get in touch and let me know. I’m not perfect and am not beyond improvement.

This morning I called a government call centre to clean up my paperwork. The call centre worker asked for my full name. When I told her it is "William Francis Bennett", she replied "Awesome".

That's good to know. My name fills people with awe.

Things are looking up.

You see a lot of passionate people if you spend time on social networks or services like Twitter.

Earlier today someone "passionate about search engine optimisation" followed me on Twitter. In recent months I've come across people passionate about real estate, online marketing and customer service management to name just a few.

They are either liars, deluded or insane.

I don't know which is worse.

Sorry. Nobody is passionate about search engine optimisation. They might enjoy working in the field. They may enjoy it a lot and be excited by the money it pays.

But they are not passionate. Not if they are mentally healthy.

The term is meaningless. It's tired. It's a cliché. It tells me the person using it is an unimaginative idiot.

If you want to say you like something a lot, think up a new way of expressing the idea and we might listen.

And while we're on the subject, the same applies to sexy.

Computers are not sexy. Pieces of software are not sexy. Attractive members of the opposite sex are sexy.