<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Pain in the English &#187; Style</title>
	<atom:link href="http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&#038;cat=6" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://painintheenglish.com</link>
	<description>Forum for the gray areas of the English language</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:42:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>One of the most&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4142</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4142#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 22:33:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dyske</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Grammar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4142</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In one of the discussions here, Brian W. tells me that the following sentence is wrong:
“This is one of the most common errors people make…”
He says it should be: “One of the more common…”
He explains:
Proper use of &#8216;most&#8217; requires the size of the set in which the subject is a member: “one of the 10 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In one of the discussions here, Brian W. tells me that the following sentence is wrong:</p>
<p>“This is one of the most common errors people make…”</p>
<p>He says it should be: “One of the <em>more</em> common…”</p>
<p>He explains:</p>
<blockquote><p>Proper use of &#8216;most&#8217; requires the size of the set in which the subject is a member: “one of the 10 most.” Without a numeric qualifier, all but the last are potentially included in the set “one of the most.” That (unfortunately) makes it as meaningful as “up to 10… or more!”</p></blockquote>
<p>Now, is this a grammatical issue or stylistic issue? I see &#8220;one of the most&#8221; being used quite often.</p>
<p>As a side note, in Japanese, &#8220;one of the most&#8221; would be an oxymoron because the concept of &#8220;most&#8221; implies that it is at the top of the list, that is, there is only one thing that could be &#8220;most&#8221; or &#8220;best&#8221;. I remember feeling awkward about the phrase &#8220;one of the most&#8221; when I was first learning English.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=4142</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Should the link include the quotes?</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4123</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4123#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 05:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dyske</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=4123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When you link something in a quote, should we include the double quotes in the link? For instance:
I asked where to look, and John answered, &#8220;Wikipedia!&#8221;
or
I asked where to look, and John answered, &#8220;Wikipedia!&#8221;
This is really a matter of style, but I&#8217;m wondering if any major sites have a style guide that specifies this.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you link something in a quote, should we include the double quotes in the link? For instance:</p>
<p>I asked where to look, and John answered, &#8220;<a href="http://wikipedia.org" target="_blank">Wikipedia!</a>&#8221;</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>I asked where to look, and John answered, <a href="http://wikipedia.org">&#8220;Wikipedia!&#8221;</a></p>
<p>This is really a matter of style, but I&#8217;m wondering if any major sites have a style guide that specifies this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=4123</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Using plural in the title</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3836</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3836#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 12:30:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Aleksey Vaneev</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3836</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m still undecided on how to spell correctly:
&#8220;Drum Track Recording Service&#8221; or
&#8220;Drum Tracks Recording Service&#8221;.
I&#039;m personally voting for the second variant, but as I&#039;m not a native English speaker, I&#039;m not sure.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m still undecided on how to spell correctly:<br />
&#8220;Drum Track Recording Service&#8221; or<br />
&#8220;Drum Tracks Recording Service&#8221;.<br />
I&#039;m personally voting for the second variant, but as I&#039;m not a native English speaker, I&#039;m not sure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=3836</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Acronyms, Abbreviations, and BBC News</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3792</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3792#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2009 20:33:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mike</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=3792</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve noticed in the past that the BBC News Web site seems to be rather hit-or-miss with its use of acronyms and abbreviations. One I see repeatedly is its use of &#8220;Nasa&#8221; for &#8220;NASA,&#8221; and another I noticed today is &#8220;Farc&#8221; instead of &#8220;FARC&#8221; for the Colombian guerrilla group. At the same time, UK, TV, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve noticed in the past that the BBC News Web site seems to be rather hit-or-miss with its use of acronyms and abbreviations. One I see repeatedly is its use of &#8220;Nasa&#8221; for &#8220;NASA,&#8221; and another I noticed today is &#8220;Farc&#8221; instead of &#8220;FARC&#8221; for the Colombian guerrilla group. At the same time, UK, TV, PM, US, and even BBC are treated as I would expect. Can anyone explain this beyond &#8220;the editors are twits&#8221;?</p>
<p>The abbreviation which prompted me to post this, though, is their habit of abbreviating &#8220;Sri Lanka&#8221; as &#8220;S Lanka.&#8221; Why would anyone think it necessary to drop those two characters?</p>
<p>By way of introduction, my name is Mike, and I was born and raised in southern California. I&#039;m a survivor of public schools through high school graduation in 1978. I know full well that my command of the English language is far from perfect, and I do not attempt to correct errors in others&#039; informal writing or speech, but journalists, authors, and others who write for public consumption I hold to a higher standard, and are therefore considered fair game. :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=3792</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>16</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reason Why</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=2474</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=2474#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Apr 2008 23:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Joseph</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=2474</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Isn&#039;t it redundant to say
That is the REASON WHY I am here.
Isn&#039;t the &#039;reason&#039; the &#039;why&#039; as well? But how come many people use it? 
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Isn&#039;t it redundant to say<br />
That is the REASON WHY I am here.</p>
<p>Isn&#039;t the &#039;reason&#039; the &#039;why&#039; as well? But how come many people use it? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=2474</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>19</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dictionaries</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1640</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1640#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 01:47:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m helping to rewrite my organisation&#039;s style guide. I prefer (and we have always used) Collins but some other colleagues prefer the OED.
Does anyone have any strong views on their respective merits?
thanks,
James
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;m helping to rewrite my organisation&#039;s style guide. I prefer (and we have always used) Collins but some other colleagues prefer the OED.</p>
<p>Does anyone have any strong views on their respective merits?</p>
<p>thanks,<br />
James</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=1640</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>double negatives</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1466</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1466#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2007 06:05:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Derek</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1466</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There wasn&#039;t a clause left in the sole agency contract that wasn&#039;t a source of conflict.
The author of a book I am editing refuses to change the above sentence to:
Every clause left in the sole agency contract was a source of conflict.
His reason is this is &#8220;a literary device to accentuate [my point]&#8221; . I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There wasn&#039;t a clause left in the sole agency contract that wasn&#039;t a source of conflict.</p>
<p>The author of a book I am editing refuses to change the above sentence to:<br />
Every clause left in the sole agency contract was a source of conflict.</p>
<p>His reason is this is &#8220;a literary device to accentuate [my point]&#8221; . I think it is bad English to use the same word twice in one sentence. Am I being pedantic?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=1466</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Impose someone to do something</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1456</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1456#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2007 10:39:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Marcelo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=1456</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I read this sentence and I felt kind of weird about it:
The suppliers imposed us to absorb price increase.
I won&#039;t say that it&#039;s wrong to use IMPOSE in that sentence, neither that ABSORB cannot be used like that, but wouldn&#039;t it sound better, and maybe even clearer to use one of the following alternatives?
1. The [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read this sentence and I felt kind of weird about it:</p>
<p>The suppliers imposed us to absorb price increase.</p>
<p>I won&#039;t say that it&#039;s wrong to use IMPOSE in that sentence, neither that ABSORB cannot be used like that, but wouldn&#039;t it sound better, and maybe even clearer to use one of the following alternatives?<br />
1. The suppliers forced us to accept price increase.<br />
2. The suppliers made us accept price increase.<br />
3. The suppliers left us no choice but to accept price increase.<br />
4. The suppliers left us no choice but to deal with price increase.<br />
5. The suppliers imposed price increase on us and we were forced to accept it.<br />
6. The suppliers imposed price increase on us and we were forced to deal with it.<br />
7. The suppliers imposed price increase on us and we could do nothing about it.</p>
<p>Any opinion appreciated&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=1456</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Using CC in business letters</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=549</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=549#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 08:32:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nicole</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=549</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When CC: a person(s) in a business letter, is it necessary to fully type their business name after their name or is an abbreviation acceptable.
For example:
CC; So-and-so FCCC or Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When CC: a person(s) in a business letter, is it necessary to fully type their business name after their name or is an abbreviation acceptable.</p>
<p>For example:<br />
CC; So-and-so FCCC or Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=549</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Capitalizing After the Colon</title>
		<link>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=501</link>
		<comments>http://painintheenglish.com/?p=501#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:29:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rhen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Style]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://painintheenglish.com/?p=501</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve read a number of books, and when an author uses a colon in a sentence to define something he wrote in simpler terms or to define in a more detailed manner, he capitalizes the next word. Such as, &#8220;The blue sky was beautiful: The sky resembled a cascading fall into the bountiful white clouds.&#8221; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve read a number of books, and when an author uses a colon in a sentence to define something he wrote in simpler terms or to define in a more detailed manner, he capitalizes the next word. Such as, &#8220;The blue sky was beautiful: The sky resembled a cascading fall into the bountiful white clouds.&#8221; Should I also capitalize the T in &#8220;The&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://painintheenglish.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=501</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
