Pain in the English
Pain in the English

Unpacking English, Bit by Bit

A community for questioning, nitpicking, and debating the quirks and rules of the English language.

Pain in the English
Pain in the English

Unpacking English, Bit by Bit

A community for questioning, nitpicking, and debating the quirks and rules of the English language.

Proofreading Services Retired

We’ve officially closed our proofreading services. You can probably guess why. With AI tools like ChatGPT now doing the job for free (and instantly), the demand for human proofreaders has all but vanished. If you still prefer a human touch, you're part of a rare—and shrinking—breed. We're now back to our roots: a forum for nitpicking the finer points of the English language. Thanks for your past support. We appreciate it.

Submit your question here.

Latest Posts : Usage

Andrew Cuomo, in his popular COVID press conferences, often uses the words “dose” and “dosage” interchangeably (at least so it seems). Here is an example:

“We have the operational capacity to do over 100,000 doses a day — we just need the dosages.”

Here is another:

“To date, New York has administered 2.5 million dosages, with about 10% of New Yorkers receiving their first dose. Ninety-two percent of dosages allocated to the state to date have been used.”

I thought “dosage” refers to the amount in a dose, like x milligrams. A single dosage can have multiple milligrams, so, when you pluralize “dosage,” what exactly are you referring to, if not the number of doses?

Read Comments

I recently ran across the working word in a document that was: “re-substantial.”

Even if it were only listed as "resubstantial," my question is this: Is this even a real word? If it is, what on earth does it actually mean?

Your help is greatly needed.

Read Comments

Is it grammatically ok to use the adjective “respective” with a singular noun ?

Many dictionaries such as Longman define the term “respective” as follows.

used before a plural noun to refer to the different things that belong to each separate person or thing mentioned.

But, I often see “respective” used with a singular noun as follows (cited from an Internet site).

Each of the Division’s three regional offices - in Chicago, New York, and San Francisco - handles criminal matters arising in its respective area and serves as the Division’s liaison with U.S. attorneys, state attorneys general, and other regional law enforcement agencies.

I wonder if the above usage is now common, though it is gramatically incorrect.

Read Comments

In our office we are advocates for our client and in representing what we do with a client we have times that we advocate for our clients. I am under the impression that you can advocate for your client to do something with them and several of my co workers disagree stating that you can only advocate for them to receive something with another provider or resource. Who is corrent? examples:

Can you correctly say:

“the care support provider provided advocacy in encouraging the client to participate in therapy” or the “Care manager advocated with the client to participate in therapy weekly.”

Can we advocate for a client to do something that they are recommended to do. Using advocated in the place of “encouraged”

office question responses appreciated.

Read Comments

In some recent fiction books written by American authors, I have seen the word “acclimated” as in “...she took a day to become acclimated to her new area.”

Shouldn’t this word be “acclimatised” or is this a case of American’s using one word and New Zealanders using another, both for the same purpose?

Read Comments

I’m reviewing a New Zealand scientific report which uses the word ‘equivalency’. This sounds to me like an Americanisation of the word ‘equivalence’, both being nouns but with the redundancy of an additional syllable in ‘equivalency’.

As we use British English (despite word processing software trying to force American English upon us) I’m inclined to use ‘equivalence’.  What do you think?

Read Comments

It grates every time I hear a local radio traffic reporter say “there is an accident just prior to the Erindale Rd turn-off.” 

I believe I’m right in thinking the word ‘prior’ is more correctly used in a time context, meaning earlier than or sooner than. 

Thoughts?

Read Comments

In American Grammar specifically, there is a somewhat new trend of referring to a singular collective as a plural noun. For example, “The band are playing at the Hall tonight.” To which I want to reply “It are?” While the British and Canadians have never understood the concept of singular collectives such as large companies or the aforementioned musical groups known by a name such as Aerosmith or Saint Motel, but why is this becoming popular in America where singular collectives have been referred to, until recently, as a singular entity? It’s on the radio, it’s on TV commercials and even in print. Are singular collectives now plural?

Read Comments

Hi everyone, I’ve got an interesting question from my student:

Trump’s “ask the gays” statement:

- what exactly is wrong with it grammatically?

Thanks!

Read Comments

I would like to know if it is correct to use the adjective “key” predicatively. I was taught that this word is like the adjective “main,” which can only be used in the attributive position. I’ve seen sentences like “This is key to the success of the plan,” but I remember typing something similar and the word processor marked it immediately as wrong. I think both “key” and “main” are special, (irregular, if you want) adjectives (in fact, they have no comparative forms) and feel they should be treated accordingly. I’ve never seen something like “This book is main in our course.” We will normally say “This is the main book in our course.” Thank you for your help!

Read Comments

Latest Comments

Walking Heavens

"Walking Heavens" seems like an interesting topic. On a related note, for those looking for reliable online gaming https://melbet-indonesia.app options in Indonesia, Melbet offers a well-established platform with a variety of games and user-friendly features. It provides a consistent experience for players interested in casino entertainment.

Salutations in letters

When choosing salutations in letters, it's important to match the tone to the context—formal greetings like "Dear Sir/Madam" suit official correspondence, while casual options work better for personal messages. For those interested in online entertainment, Melbet https://melbet-tunisia.net in Tunisia provides a secure and straightforward platform for casino gaming, with a variety of options catering to different preferences.

Both "40 and 50%" and "40% and 50%" can be correct depending on context, but clarity is key. Using "40% and 50%" clearly indicates percentages, which helps avoid confusion. On a different note, if you're interested in online gaming, Melbet melbet-tunisia.net in Tunisia offers a wide range of casino options with user-friendly features. It’s a platform many find convenient for exploring various games safely.

Alternate Prepositions?

The use of alternate prepositions often depends on context and the intended meaning. For instance, “on” and “upon” might be interchangeable in some cases, while in others they change the tone or formality. Similarly, “in” vs. “within” or “at” vs. “to” may depend on nuance. It’s like how platforms adapt language for clarity—online services like tunisia-bet https://tunisia-bet.com/ in Tunisia ensure their interface and terms are clear to users to avoid confusion. Language precision plays an important role across different fields.

Are proverbs dying?

qw

How about THIS one: when you thank somebody for something and they reply, "NO PROBLEM". Where the heck that THAT ONE come from???? Has "you're welcome" now disappeared from the lexicon?

I am so freekin' glad I am not the only user of good English who HATES that lame, flimsy bunch of so-called words. Your description of perfect...condescending and patronizing.

Touchy-feelly is the perfect adjective for the lame usage of reaching out. AS another comment replied...it assaulted his ears...it really is a mushy, lame assault via stupid verbiage.
And William Pelow's comment couldn't be more PERFECT!!