What, do you think,is a better passive construction for the following sentence? ‘’They took no notice of her rude remarks.'’ A) ‘’No notice was taken of her rude remarks.'’ B) ‘’Her rude remarks were taken no notice of.'’
I know that the ‘B’ option is correct, at least it should be, but I wondered if ‘A’ is possible at all. Does it sound natural to you, the English people? Can’t we treat the word ‘notice’ as an object of the active sentence and then make it a subject of the passive one?
12 comments • Posted in Grammar
I’m an unfortunate high school student who had to take the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills today, and an interesting problem came up. Is it “none are” or “none is”? (I’m leaning towards “none is,” even though I normally say “none are”).
Are there circumstances when both are correct?
4 comments • Posted in Grammar
“I am home.” Does “home” function here as a noun or an adverb?
8 comments • Posted in Grammar
A Japanese friend asked me why some signs say 30 minute parking and not 30 minuteS parking, which he expected would be the case.
I was at a loss. I couldn’t come up with any other examples of this, either. What is this phenomenon called? Any rationale for why we do it this way?
Thanks!
14 comments • Posted in Grammar
At some vague point in the past few years, someone, somewhere decreed that when writing about an individual and his/her vocation, it would henceforth be necessary to affix “the” before the vocation. For example, “The blues guitarist, BB King.” Or “The mystery writer Clive Cussler.” How come and for what possible purpose? It’s been common parlance forever to simply say “Architect Frank Lloyd Wright,” or “Writer and philosopher Henry David Thoreau.” Faster, cleaner and much more listenable -- the creeping “The” is especially jarring when read aloud. Checked the NY Times and AP Stylebooks for it and there’s no mention. Anyone?
8 comments • Posted in Grammar
I have often come across cases where the rule that you only put ‘an’ in front of a word starting with a vowel seems to have been violated, as e. g. in:
“What’s needed is (a) conclusive research and (b) an holistic approach to changing the nation’s dietary habits”.
I have also seen “an historic event”. Can someone enlighten me as to what’s happening here?
17 comments • Posted in Grammar
I believe this phrase is commonly used by people who are Notary Publics, but for the life of me, I can not figure out what exactly goes in the blanks - of course with the exception of the date. Given under _______ hand ____ and seal ______ this _____ day of _______.
I wrote this sentence talking about a website: “This is neither the beginning nor the end of something.”
I wanted to say that I wasn’t trying to start something new, it was just something temporary before I started the real thing.
Someone told me “something” is grammatically incorrect and that I should have used “anything” but in my opinion it implies a change in the whole meaning of the sentence.
I’d like to hear some other opinions about it.
6 comments • Posted in Grammar
Is the word “rum” like the word “Deer”? You never say “deers” for the plural--what about rum. Is it both singular and plural in that form? You can never say “rums” can you?
7 comments • Posted in Grammar
Is it appropriate to say, “If it were possible for tides to cause earthquakes, scientific evidence would have been found long ago.” or is “If it had been possible for tides to cause earthquakes, scientific evidence would have been found long ago.” more appropriate?
9 comments • Posted in Grammar
On my way to work every morning I happen to pass a particular billboard expounding the services of a mortgage maid (or whatever the technical term happens to be... loan officer possibly?) On this billboard is a sad attempt at wit wherein the LO has her son standing next to her profile wearing what is presumably his Karate uniform.
Above them both, a caption reads “‘My mom is a black belt at mortgage!’”
My contention, beyond the obvious missing s from mortgage, is that “in” should replace “at”, so that it instead reads, “My mom is a black belt in mortgages!”
I realize if we somehow verbed the word mortgage (and yes, I realize verb itself isn’t a verb), we could use at in a classically technical sense. Consider “I am proficient at mortgaging” as an example. However, the idea of the classification “black belt” makes this null and void as far as I see it. Since we’re speaking of a particular class within an imagined range of expertise at a subject, then “in” becomes the default modifier regardless of a verb or noun ending.
To put it more concisely, since “black belt” is a particular class of status to the relative noun, then there is really no way to use “at” as the correct preposition.
Do I get the black belt IN grammar or am I clearly far too obsessed with this particular imagined injustice to be a well-developed individual.
Thank you in advance,
-Q
7 comments • Posted in Grammar
For example: “a couple of things” vs “a couple things”
I know “a couple of things” is grammatically correct, but I also often hear couple used without the “of”, and by educated people.
Now I’m confused. Isn’t “couple things” wrong?
11 comments • Posted in Grammar
What would you folk say to me if I-in a serious context-mix the two words, promoter and protector to make the word “promotector?” Would you still let me come over here? :-) Would it be better if I use a slash like “promo/tector” or just promotector will do? Or shall I just go get a life? How about “promo-protector?”
7 comments • Posted in Grammar
I would like to know the Question to ask for which we get a reply like...
“Manmohan Singh is the Fouteenth Prime Minister of India.”
I want the rank which Manmohan has.....
(Not a question like “Who is the Fourteenth Prime minister of India?”) I need Fourteen as the anser when inquired about Manmohan Singh.
I appreciate your help...
56 comments • Posted in Grammar
Alright, my pet peeve is the confusion behind the use of the words “less” and “fewer”.
My thought is “fewer” relates to units while “less” relates to a quality or state of being. Basically, “If you can count them, use the word ‘fewer’ and if you can’t, it’s ‘less’”.
“Fewer cars on the road results in less traffic. This means less stress which, in turn, will result in fewer headaches.”
That makes sense, doesn’t it?
But I constantly see in the print media and hear on the radio or TV people reporting, “...this will mean less jobs for workers ...”.
I recently saw a full-page ad for a Ford hybrid fuel/electric SUV which touted “...less trips to the gas pump” and (interestingly enough, in the same paragraph) “fewer repairs”. Hey! Elements of Style, anyone?
Now that my point of ire is established, the real question is that of my Subject line, the ubiquitous sign at the supermarket. Which is correct? Rather than tell what I’ve heard, I’ll just let this go on the table for all to consider.
27 comments • Posted in Grammar
Why does ‘not’ in ‘you’d better not go there’ stands separately after ‘had better’ phrase but forms ‘hadn’t’ in the question:’Hadn’t you better go now?’ I see no logic here...
6 comments • Posted in Grammar
I wrote:
“And up back to his room upstairs would go little bastard, back to his beloved stories of lonely wolves in the Great North and sailors stranded on desert islands, wondering where this interesting piece of semiotic, as handy as it might come considering the volatility of the family atmosphere and the frequency with which possessive adjectives and other epithets would fly around, did exactly fit in the regular schedule of grandmother’s lessons on “accords grammaticaux” , “concordance des temps” and other neatly logical delicacies.”
It’s been suggested that I should write:
“And up back up to his room upstairs would go the the little bastard, back to his beloved stories of lonely wolves in the Great North and sailors stranded on desert islands, wondering where this interesting piece of semiotic, as handy as it might come considering the volatility of the family atmosphere and the frequency with which possessive adjectives and other epithets would fly around, did exactly fit in the regular schedule of grandmother’s lessons on “accords grammaticaux” , “concordance des temps” and other neatly logical delicacies.”
To which I object:
1) Don’t people sometimes talk like that:
“And up [rising intonation, short pause] back to his room [falling intonation]”
or is that an utter impossibility in english, whether written or spoken?
2) “the little bastard”
It’s possible to say: “back to his room would go little Pete” or “little Tom”, right?
Now, the story here is about a boy who’s not the son of his father, and he is the only one who doesn’t know it. And when the family members interact with him, they’re always affraid to let the big secret slip, an when they look at him, they don’t see little Pete or little Tom, but a big problem. That’s why here “bastard” is used like a personal name, because “little bastard” is the name that’s in their mind when they think about him (they actually love him very much). Is that possible? Should I uppercase “Little Bastard”?
I wonder too wether the clause between “wondering where this interesting piece of semiotic,” and ” did exactly fit ” is too long, and the reader loses track of the subject when he gets to the verb, or is it flowing smoothly enough?
12 comments • Posted in Grammar
Trying this query on Google to no avail, I was asked today whether it’s correct to say “a unit” or “an unit”. The rules of grammar I was taught at school (in England) would suggest the latter; yet the former seems, somehow, more right. Pages on Google use both freely, sometimes using both in the same document. So - which is correct?
18 comments • Posted in Grammar
I have seen this construction of “envy” used before and it seems wrong to me. Examples:
“I also don’t envy you the probable consequences of this.”
“I do not envy David the frustration he’ll experience.”
These seem completely wrong to me, but were written by a very grammatically-correct person. I am therefore confused. Are the above constructions right or wrong? If they are correct, what makes them correct?
22 comments • Posted in Grammar
My friend sent me a message saying, “My dad is work at home.” I said that it should be “My dad is working at home” or “My dad works at home”
My friend said what he wrote was correct. He said “work at home” is an incoherent phrase. because many people do their work at home.
Is “My dad is work at home” correct?
17 comments • Posted in Grammar
