Submitted by Cheshire • November 10, 2011
Do we change tenses on common expressions when writing fiction? “God only knew” sounds bizarre, but I find it difficult to let “knows” persist when writing...
7 comments
•
Posted in Expression
Submitted by sigurd • November 10, 2011
In English, I know it’s perfectly correct/proper/formal to, for lack of a better word, ‘‘shorten’’ phrases and sentences in a certain way in some cases as in ‘Be that true, ...’ (= ‘If that is true, ...’), ‘if need be’ (= ‘if it is necessary’), ‘come what may’ (‘regardless of what may come/happen’) etc.
So, I’m wondering if similar rules apply to ‘Why be anonymous?’, ‘Why so excited/angry/etc?’ and ‘Why the question?’ as well as to ‘Haven’t you anything better to do?’ and ‘Have you any idea [...]?’, which I also hear a lot from seemingly formal English-speakers. Are they correct English?
7 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by Ophelia • November 9, 2011
I’ve done some research about the use of “for example” in its shortened form, but have been left more confused than ever.
Is it eg, e.g., or eg.? It comes from the Latin “exempli gratia”, so I would have thought it correct to place a period after the e and after the g in place of the missing letters.
Yet, in official documents all over the place I see one or two periods, or none at all. I have in front of me an official document from the New South Wales government, The Board of Studies English K-6 Syllabus. Throughout this document each example is preceded by “eg”, no dots at all. Same with other Board of Studies documents, however other Education Department documents do have e.g.
Personally I think that e.g. is more correct, but seeing no dots at all in an official document on teaching English to primary school students, had me wondering whether the convention in this case has changed, or whether it might simply be a matter of choice with no one way being either right or wrong.
Which is correct, or doesn’t it matter?
30 comments
•
Posted in Punctuation and Mechanics
Submitted by cathyem • November 5, 2011
I did a search and came up with nothing relating to the use of “enamored”. I am seeing, more and more often, “enamored with” and “enamored by” when I was taught that it is correctly “enamored of”.
I just opened the latest issue of Cook’s Country magazine and this quote jumped out at me: “[...]Americans became enamored with international cooking.” Is this correct? Am I just a purist who needs to lighten up?
19 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by Hairy Scot • November 5, 2011
The phrase “would of” seems to be coming more and more common. I have heard it used in a number of films and have also seen it used in print when the author is depicting direct speech. However, I was amazed to see it used outside of the direct speech context in a novel I am currently reading. I appreciate that “would’ve” could be heard as “would of” but the increasing use of this phrase is damning testimony to the malaise that afflicts our language.
22 comments
•
Posted in Opinion / Criticism
Submitted by John Colbourne • November 1, 2011
J.K .Rowling always wanted to be an author.
J.K. Rowling had always wanted to be an author.
J.K. Rowling has always wanted to be an author.
I assume “has always wanted” is incorrect because she became an author.
Please, which one is proper?
9 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by Margaret A Giordano • October 29, 2011
Is it “8 inches is” or “8 inches are”?
15 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by Thomas guzzi • October 28, 2011
I am playing rooster in a production of Annie and I need some terms of endearment that were used in the 20s and 30s. I use the term “blondie” but the woman I say it to isn’t blonde. How about “sweet cheeks”? Any help?
4 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Rob • October 25, 2011
Is it actually correct to use “American” when referring to residents of the United States? I was traveling in Peru last summer and to my surprise realized for the first time that people down in South America consider themselves to be “Americans” too. After all, South America is as “America” as North America, right?
So to be clear, for a technical publication I’m working on, what’s the best way to refer to residents of the US? Is “American” still acceptable? The study I’m quoting uses “US residents,” but there are times when that phrase becomes unwieldy.
29 comments
•
Posted in Usage
Submitted by Tonto • October 25, 2011
Is there a grammatical difference between saying “I walked down the street backwards” and “I walked down the street backward” (without the “s”)? Is one of them incorrect, or are they interchangeable? Does the same go for “forward(s)” and “toward(s)”?
11 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by sigurd • October 15, 2011
Is separating two coordinating-conjunction-linked sentences, the former having a comma(s), with a semicolon instead of a comma logically justified?
In GrammarBook.com’s Semicolons category, Rule 5. reads:
Use the semicolon between two sentences joined by a coordinating conjunction when one or more commas appear in the first sentence.
Examples: When I finish here, I will be glad to help you; and that is a promise I will keep.
If she can, she will attempt that feat; and if her husband is able, he will be there to see her.
16 comments
•
Posted in Coinage
Submitted by Greg Allen • October 10, 2011
Why is the term “attorneys general” correct? It used to be “attorney generals” ... There are multiple attorney generals.
If I was describing a group of Army generals, I wouldn’t say “Armies General” ... would I?
11 comments
•
Posted in Style
Submitted by AnWulf • October 8, 2011
“What can I do besides complaining” sounds wrong to me but I can’t say why ... I think it should be complain.
“What can I do besides complain?”
“What can I do but complain?”
However, “Besides complaining, what can I do?” sounds ok.
Any thoughts? Or am I completely off base here?
4 comments
•
Posted in Style
Submitted by Astartes • October 7, 2011
I have an ear for when people use bad grammar, especially the use of prepositions at the end of a clause. I was recently watching a show, however, and a character said “Toys are meant to be played with.” What is the correct wording of this phrase? It is killing me.
43 comments
•
Posted in Grammar
Submitted by Perfect Pedant • October 5, 2011
“Under urgency”?
I recently came across this phrase for the first time in my life.
The context was:-
“Parliament passed the Copyright Amendment Act into law under urgency last night”
Can’t really put my finger on why, and I can’t at the moment come up with an alternative, but it just doesn’t sound right.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
6 comments
•
Posted in Usage
Submitted by Perfect Pedant • October 5, 2011
Why does sports media persist in the use of the phrase “hone in” instead of “home in”.
Traditionally, a missile homes in (not hones in) on a target. Hone means “to sharpen.” The verb home means “to move toward a goal” or “to be guided to a target.”
24 comments
•
Posted in Usage
Submitted by sigurd • October 3, 2011
Are “whensoever” and “whenever” really the same?
In some of the dictionaries I checked, “whensoever” is defined “whenever”; but I disagree.
For instance, I think “The students may leave whenever they so choose” can be written “[...] whensoever they choose” because “so” is already part of “whensoever”.
1 comment
•
Posted in Usage
Submitted by sigurd • September 30, 2011
If a semicolon is used to contrast two sentences, we can omit repetitive words by using a comma, as in:
“To err is human; to forgive, divine”
and
“The cat was orange; the dog, brown.”
However, if no semicolon is used, can we still do the same? For example:
“You’re our son, Heracles, and we, your family.”
5 comments
•
Posted in Style
Submitted by Brus • September 25, 2011
“If I was the Prime Minister. ...” said Ed Miliband, British Labour party leader, today, Sunday 24th September 2011. Is this not how to phrase it if it remains a possibility that he was once Prime Minister, or if he is not sure if he was, or is reluctant to admit it?
“If I were the Prime Minister, ...”, using the subjunctive mood of the verb, would suggest that he is not Prime minister but is about to tell us what he would do if he were the PM.
If the subjunctive is now defunct in UK Labour politics, as I suspect, how did he continue to tell us what he would have done, if he were the PM, without using the subjunctive? “if I was the PM, I ~~~~~ ???” It cannot be done.
129 comments
•
Posted in Style
Submitted by Max_Elliott • September 22, 2011
I never know whether to use “it” in the following sentence: “Just because ___, (it) doesn’t mean ____.” In other words, would you say,
“Just because I was mean to you, it doesn’t mean you should be mean to me.” OR
“Just because I was mean to you, doesn’t mean you should be mean to me.” OR
“Just because I was mean to you, that doesn’t mean you should be mean to me.”
I hear people using the second variation all the time, but it seems that the third is preferable. Thoughts?
10 comments
•
Posted in Style
