Hypothetically speaking, of course!

So! Truth or dare!

Hypothetically, let's say you click on a story on YWS and lo! It has no grammatical or spelling errors. This is all very hypothetical, by the way.

What would you critique instead? Or would you critique at all?

I Would, there is more to a story than grammar. Perfect grammar doesn't mean perfect story.

Yeah.. I agree with Adam. There is always something to critique, no matter how perfect the grammar and spelling.

There's dialogue, characterization, description, plot and so much more. Grammar is just a minor part of any story.

Depends on the story and whether or not you guys have already gotten to it. After someone's received 5+ reviews I tend to leave it alone.

I rarely critique for grammar. The most important parts of a story are the characters, the dialogue, the plot, and the style. Grammar, for me, is something you take care of in your final revisions. Grammar is the technical stuff, the how. The art - and sometimes the part of a story that suffers most - is the what, the where, and the who.

-Kylan

I tend to be big on grammar (and punctuation) when I critique a story, too. But as everyone else said, there is more to a story than the grammar. So, if a story has absolutely perfect grammar, and there's not even anything that you might quibble with stylistically, then I would just take it as a bigger challenge to help the person work on their other stuff. And be sure to congratulate the person on their amazing grammar!

I would say phew! Someone finally proofread! Now there's something to critique! and proceed to critique it.

I'd have to agree, it doesn't matter how perfect the grammar and spelling is, it doesn't make a great story. There is always something to critique--correct grammar just makes it seem more professional.

I would ask politely the writer (if it was awful) to try to improve their grammer and that I'd critique after they fixed it up.

If the grammer is just bad then I'd offer a normal in-depth crit.

xx

Well, I don't like critiquing grammar and spelling anyway, so I'd probably tell them to use a spell-check and tidy it up, then go on to the main depth of the piece. If it was atrocious, though, I'd tell them to sort it, and then come back later.

Nah, if a story has perfect grammar that means the story itself is perfect. Why on earth would I critique it? It's not like writing has more to it than grammar. Plot? Description? Psh. Irrelevant, so long as all the commas are in order. Really, Snoink. Really.


Colly

I rarely critique grammar or spelling. I comment about how the story works, if the dialogue works, if it flows well, if it's enjoyable, if it's authentic, you know, if it's well-written. Well-written as if he uses words that match each other, that make the text just rush by, rather than making it a chore to read through.