diff --git a/not_so_obvious_python_stuff.ipynb b/not_so_obvious_python_stuff.ipynb
index 6db49ed..1ad2108 100644
--- a/not_so_obvious_python_stuff.ipynb
+++ b/not_so_obvious_python_stuff.ipynb
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
  "metadata": {
   "name": "",
-  "signature": "sha256:29a120258e2d108ed5eace08e071ad866ae379b4f24fde804401ee858a2090fb"
+  "signature": "sha256:5f8052b5458fbe30e4066fd51688157e823dbbcce9f2e4ef402acfc6af40d046"
  },
  "nbformat": 3,
  "nbformat_minor": 0,
@@ -985,7 +985,7 @@
       "\n",
       "**A. Jesse Jiryu Davis** has a nice explanation for this phenomenon (Original source: [http://emptysqua.re/blog/python-increment-is-weird-part-ii/](http://emptysqua.re/blog/python-increment-is-weird-part-ii/))\n",
       "\n",
-      "If we try to extend the list via `+=` *\"then the statement executes STORE_SUBSCR, which calls the C function PyObject_SetItem, which checks if the object supports item assignment. In our case the object is a tuple, so PyObject_SetItem throws the TypeError. Mystery solved.\"*"
+      "If we try to extend the list via `+=` *\"then the statement executes `STORE_SUBSCR`, which calls the C function `PyObject_SetItem`, which checks if the object supports item assignment. In our case the object is a tuple, so `PyObject_SetItem` throws the `TypeError`. Mystery solved.\"*"
      ]
     },
     {