Suppose you point out a number of typos in a passage - like he wrote argument instead of argument; fiend instead of friend. Obviously these are typos. But to draw attention to them can you say I found lots of tyops in the passage - no sic?

  • Please try to format this so that it can be read, including placing mentions in italic. And please ask only one question per question. – tchrist Jul 29 '17 at 22:07
  • (2) A neologism is a new word. If just any old permutation of letters is considered to qualify as a word, the term becomes meaningless. 'Tyop' has not reached wordness until it has met the frequency-of-use requirements of OED say. Though it has been used as a deliberate misspelling of typo before, as UD explains. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 29 '17 at 23:23
  • Your approach is risky. It uses humor in the form of teasing, which people will interpret as charming, neutral, or humiliating. I'd keep this one straight in writing, maybe lighter person to person. Constructive criticism is easier to give than receive. Say no to tyop. – Yosef Baskin Jul 30 '17 at 1:44
  • I think it looks too much like an accidental mitsake to be instantly recognizable as an intentional error. Also, you seem to have accidentally mis-misspelled argument in your first example. – Sven Yargs Dec 6 '17 at 19:04

Vali, many of us choose to use (sic) and nothing says you have to… so long as you don't mind taking the blame.

Yes, I found lots of tyops in the passage will go a long way, but still how will your readers know which are quoted errors and which are introduced by you?


The entire point of [sic] is to indicate that this is "as it was written", not your own re-writing or quoting. If you leave it out the typos, misspellings, etc., will be considered your own.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.