Your Pain Is Our Pleasure

We proofread your Google Docs or Microsoft Word files within 24 hours. We hate grammatical errors with passion. Learn More

 

Discussion Forum

This is a forum to discuss the gray areas of the English language for which you would not find answers easily in dictionaries or other reference books. You can browse through the latest questions and comments below. If you have a question of your own, please submit it here.

Search Pain in the English

Latest Posts

I’m stuck on the correct use of “un-” (as in “reverse action”) and “de-”. Specifically, I want to write that a student should change an incorrectly capitalized word to the lower case. Should he “uncapitalize” it or “decapitalize” it? It’s true that the word should be uncapitalized, but since he incorrectly capitalized it in the first place, must he now decapitalize it?

Read Comments

“It has a great construction” sets my teeth on edge every time a writer I work with uses the phrase in written English. Is this correct/standard usage? It sounds so wrong to me, but I can’t point to the rule it violates.

Am I simply biased against... A perfectly acceptable construction?

These sound/seem so wrong:. My t-shirt has a durable cotton construction.

That house has a great construction.

With a construction of 100% cotton, her dress...

I think you omit the indefinite article.

Read Comments

When using the word prohibits... which is correct?

...which prohibits fences 4 ft in height from being erected ... or ...which prohibits fences 4 ft in height to be erected

...which prohibits any fence from being constructed... or ...which prohibits any fence to be constructed

Read Comments

Apart from the fact that convention is clearly “Table of Contents”, is there a grammatical reasoning for “Table of Content” vs “Table of Contents”?

I guess it comes down to whether the noun “content” is one that can be counted, i.e. several contents, or not.

My instinct is that in fact, content is not an enumerable noun, i.e. it should be Table of Content. But does that mean that MS Word, LaTeX and all other Desktop Publishers out there are just wrong?

YD

Read Comments

Good Day All,

I live in Trinidad and Tobago and for the last 46 years there’s been an argument about a point of grammar in our National Anthem. The last line is (what we learn in kindergarden):

“Here every creed and race FIND an equal place”

Some say this is grammatically correct. Others argue that it should be, “Here every creed and race FINDS an equal place”. Thousands of Letters to the Editor have been written arguing about this issue. Anyone care to help us solve this dilemma?

Read Comments

On the DC Metro, we are told: “The next stop will be X”.

When will the next stop be x?

I’m pretty sure the next stop *is* X!

Read Comments

What about proper nouns as in team mascots? Our school mascot is a Grizzly. Would students be Grizzlies or Grizzlys? Since it’s a school’s mascot I’d like for it to be correct, but for the last 20 years it’s been spelled Grizzlies. I believe that spelling to be incorrect. Academic input please:o)

Read Comments

I heard an ad on the radio recently for a company that performs medical procedures. At the end they said “We accept all major insurances.” That didn’t sound quite right to me, and I don’t think I’ve ever heard the plural of the word “insurance”. If it were me, I would’ve said “We accept all major insurance plans.” Am I right that there is no plural form of the word?

On a related note, I’ve heard, mostly on TV news shows, “damages” a lot. I know that the word exists, meaning a monetary judgement awarded by a court, but they used it when they meant “damage”. For example, “Due to the ice storm, many damages were done to homes,” or “The car suffered severe damages from the accident.” This is improper usage, correct?

Read Comments

I have a feeling I’ll look at this again in a while and find the answer screamingly obvious. Do these parallel the form of “independent” exactly? As “independence of” seems really wrong, though “independent of” seems ok. I’m confused.

Read Comments

I heard this sentence on radio or TV and while it seems correct grammatically, I believe the verb be is in the subjunctive mode, somehow it did not feel colloquial. Any comments?

Read Comments

Latest Comments

“Me neither.” or “Me either”

  • osbert
  • February 22, 2018, 2:02pm

"Me either" makes as much sense as "I could care less", I think both are dull-brained mistakes, possibly originally by a non-native English speaker, then subsequently accepted as good English. "Me neither" is rough, but at least logical: "nor I, either" just isn't heard these days, but "neither am/have I" is commonly heard and logical. Grammar: descriptive rather than prescriptive, but some howlers ought to be laughed out of court.

“Me neither.” or “Me either”

  • osbert
  • February 22, 2018, 2:01pm

"Me either" makes as much sense as "I could care less", I think both are dull-brained mistakes, possibly originally by a non-native English speaker, then subsequently accepted as good English. "Me neither" is rough, but at least logical: "nor I, either" just isn't heard these days, but "neither am/have I" is commonly heard and logical. Grammar: descriptive rather than prescriptive, but some howlers ought to be laughed out of court.

LEGO does not refer to the bricks, but to the brand. Therefore, it is incorrect to say LEGOs, as you would be referring to multiple LEGO companies. The only correct way to refer to them is "LEGO bricks."

The name "LEGO" is not derived from English language, and therefore it cannot be stated that the very English method of adding an 's' for a plural is definitively correct. In this case I would suggest LEGO pieces (as the company itself requests), especially now that the LEGO brand has diversified into films, video games, and even cake tins. It is worth noting, however, that throughout most of the world the plural of LEGO has always been simply LEGO.

Neither is or neither are

  • jayles
  • February 20, 2018, 10:18pm

On google books "neither are to blame" shows up just nineteen times, whereas "neither is to blame" has over five thousand results.

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1432&bih=...

Neither is or neither are

  • jayles
  • February 19, 2018, 4:54am

" neither were significant predictors of the outcome measures"
"they were not working mischief, neither were they doing any great good; "
"neither were most of their members prepared to take part as citizens."
"Things are either what they appear to be: or they neither are, nor appear to be"
"And if the fountains are not gods, neither are the rivers,"
"Neither are we truly portraying what Christ's disciple means. "

Both are possible, depending on the context:

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=n...

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22neither%20we...

Neither is or neither are

  • Edinrin
  • February 17, 2018, 10:42am

'Neither are' is correct
For example: neither are to blame for the damage done.

well, actually, grammar rules themselves don't exist. there has never been any set rules, because the "rules" depend on how a majority decides to speak, and they change as the years go by. "ain't" used to be considered grammatically correct and was used by rich English folk, but when "commoners" started using it, they decided it wasn't proper English. this fact won't change how society treats grammar (like it's friggin LAW), but I feel like we should all be more lax and just use whatever feels right to us. I mean, soon, "I did good on my test" will be considered proper grammar.

On Tomorrow

It’s a church thing. I’m willing to bet that the people heard saying “on tomorrow” are heavily influenced by the church. Church folk are the people I’ve ever heard say it.

There is a male coworker that when ever he speaks to the females in our office always starts with "Heyyy name, how's it going?" Is it just me, i feel it is so disrespectful and annoying. What are your thoughts?