Proofreading Service - Pain in the English
Proofreading Service - Pain in the English

Your Pain Is Our Pleasure

24-Hour Proofreading Service—We proofread your Google Docs or Microsoft Word files. We hate grammatical errors with a passion. Learn More

Proofreading Service - Pain in the English
Proofreading Service - Pain in the English

Your Pain Is Our Pleasure

24-Hour Proofreading Service—We proofread your Google Docs or Microsoft Word files. We hate grammatical errors with a 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.

Do You Have a Question?

Submit your question

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

Great question, Susan! In full capital case, superscript letters and abbreviations like Jr. should ideally remain in all caps for consistency. However, small caps can be a good choice for abbreviations like "Jr." to keep the text legible and balanced with the rest of the name.

For instance:

JANE MCDONALD (with the superscript letter in normal caps)
WILLIAM DOE, JR. (keeping Jr. in all caps or using small caps for a more refined look).
This way, you maintain uniformity while also giving a slight differentiation to the abbreviations for readability.

"This platform is such a great resource for language enthusiasts! It's amazing to see discussions about tricky English usage and grammar. I’ll definitely be coming back to explore more and share insights!" and The Clinical SAS course provides comprehensive training in SAS and clinical data for healthcare and pharma, featuring video tutorials, live class recordings, real-time projects, and a digital certificate.Clinical SAS Video Course

This Is Most Useful And Give More Knowledge For Me And Let Me Share It For Alot Of People.

“My” works better here since “mine” is a standalone possessive. The sentence should read: “I so appreciate you taking my and Gregg’s child to school today.”

GoogleAdWordsTutorial

The company 'are'

  • swabbyk
  • December 24, 2024, 1:24pm

I'm having trouble with 'woke' English. I don't think it is precise enough. For example: I saw a computer generated message the other day on Instagram. It said something like: "Lois sent their pictures to the Wall Street Journal." Whose pictures? In reality she sent 'her' pictures, not "their" pictures. The only way I knew it was "her" was because I was familiar with the situation.

Have diphthongs gone for good?

Looking through the comments, we must be the only publishing house still using the æ and œ ligatures regularly. OUP all the way, except for this.

I feel it should be Writers’ Forum, to indicate a plural and a possessive. Some use it interchangeably but using an apostrophe would be more correct.
However, their is always their and never thier. ;)

If it refers to a load of job histories for one person, the plural would be CURRICULA VITAE (course of one life), but the equivalent for multiple people would be CURRICULA VITARUM (courses of many lives).

“Based out of”: Why?

It’s a malaphor - an unintentional combination two idioms. I could say I’m “based in” or “out of” to mean the same thing. E.g., “I’m based in Atlanta” or “I’m out of Atlanta.” But if I say I’m “based out of Atlanta,” it combines those two idioms and produces a confusing result which could be interpreted to mean the exact opposite of what is trying to be expressed.

Past perfect with until

She didn’t realize that she was addicted to nicotine until she had smoked ten cigarettes a day.

This is because the past perfect tense "had smoked" is used to show that the smoking occurred before the realization. So, her smoking ten cigarettes a day happened first, and her realization of being addicted happened later.

Both sentences are grammatically correct, but they emphasize different sequences:

"She hadn’t realized that she was addicted to nicotine until she smoked ten cigarettes a day."

This suggests that the lack of realization (not knowing she was addicted) continued until she reached the point of smoking ten cigarettes. The not-knowing came first.
"She didn’t realize that she was addicted to nicotine until she had smoked ten cigarettes a day."

Here, the past perfect "had smoked" clarifies that she smoked the cigarettes before her realization.