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 : Expression
Does “hate with passion” sound wrong to you? Should it be “hate with a passion” instead?
One of the visitors to Pain in the English emailed us and asked if “hate with passion” is grammatically correct or not.
Here are some other similar phrases we can consider:
Sing with passion
Sing with a passion
Sing with feeling
Sing with a feeling
Say it with feeling
Say it with a feeling
When we analyze these expressions, we begin to feel that the article “a” adds some sense of specificity, like:
Sing with a passion befitting Pagliaccio!
Sing with a feeling of remorse!
Say it with a feeling of malaise!
Without the article, the word “passion” and “feeling” both remain abstract concepts.
What do you think?
I cringe when I read (a million times a week), “I am so sorry,” “I am so happy”...
It feels like there is part of the statement missing, like “I am so happy I could cry,” or “I am so sorry, I don’t know what to say.” Is “so anything” a legitimate phrase on its own? Or am I right in thinking it needs more?
I run. I ran. I had ran. I had run.
I went. I had went. I had gone.
There appear to be localized aberrations where people insist on saying “had ran” even though they know “had run” is proper. They seem to be victims of conforming to local language.
This group of people seems to me to come from a region. I grew up in California, and I never saw this. I started seeing it in Colorado. It was a little more common in Kansas. It was very common in GA. It always showed up in people who had moved west from eastern locations like MA, KY, DE, VA, WV, NC.
What is it that I am trying to say here? Peer pressure overrides language correctness? Is there a better way to refer to this?
Isn’t “agree the terms” simply bad form? The following is taken from today’s online Guardian in a quote from Theresa May: . . . the prime minister said she believed it was “necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside those of our withdrawal from the European Union”. Then as the article continues, the same usage appears in the Guardian’s own words: “The EU institutions and 27 remaining member states, however, have long said they were determined the divorce settlement, such as the rights of EU citizens in the UK and Britons on the continent and the size of Britain’s exit bill, must first be agreed before substantive talks on a future relationship could begin.”
Agree to the terms, yes; but agree the terms?
Be agreed upon, yes; but settlement be agreed before?
I have not run across this usage in US English, so is it something happening in British writing/speech?
Consider the following sentence: “Last year, the rent was $500, but now it’s risen to $1,000. The rent is two times higher than it used to be.”
To me, this sentence is misleading, since “two times higher” would mean starting with a value of $500 and duplicating it, twice (in other words, $500 + $500 x 2 = $1,500). It seems the correct sentence should read:
“The rent is two times as high as used to be.”
Are both forms acceptable? Unfortunately, it seems that the more confusing form (”two times higher”) has become more common.
Whilst I appreciate that it is increasingly less common to write or receive a letter these days - and that traditional usage has been Dear Sir/Madam->Yours truly/faithfully or Dear Mr Smith ->Yours sincerely - the few letters rarely follow these “rules”.
I have had (1) Dear Mr Smith without any closure from the UK Pensions Service, (2) Dear Mr Smith->Yours sincerely from the local power board, and (3) Hi Mr Smith->Until next time from my bank. Personally I have never used ‘Yours faithfully’ (which smacks of subservience) since the turn of the century, even when applying for a job. I do still use “Sincerely” in a few emails (particularly when making a complaint).
For the life of me, I cannot see why bygone formalities are still required for examinations such as the International English Language Test.
As to emails, it seems more difficult to be formal. Mostly I use “Hi + first name” and end with “Cheers”.
My question is what are other people in English-speaking countries experiencing? Is stuff like “Yours faithfully” “Yours truly” now passé? If so is there any reason to teach them?
This sentence:
“By securing a permanent US commitment to the defence of all its members from 1949 onwards, Nato changed the calculus confronting potential aggressors.”
appeared in this Daily Telegraph article.
I think I grasp what the author is getting at, but it does seem a most unusual and perhaps incorrect use of “calculus.”
Or am I behind the times once again?
The definitions of “go figure” that I found in various dictionaries do not match what I thought it meant. Is it just me?
Here are what I found:
“said to express the speaker’s belief that something is amazing or incredible.”
“used when you tell someone a fact and you then want to say that the fact is surprising, strange or stupid”
“Expresses perplexity, puzzlement, or surprise (as if telling somebody to try to make sense of the situation).”
I thought “go figure” meant the same as “duh!” or “just my luck”. That is, it’s obvious after the fact. It implies “I should have known.”
Let’s take some of the examples that appear in these dictionaries:
“The car wouldn’t start yesterday no matter what I did, but today it works just fine. Go figure.”
My interpretation of this is that, given how unlucky he is in general, in retrospect, it’s obvious that this happened to him again. It’s just part of being unlucky in general.
“She says she wants to have a conversation, but when I try, she does all the talking. Go figure.”
My interpretation for this is that she is already known to the speaker as a talkative person, but since she claims to want a conversation, the speaker gave her another chance, but again, all she does is talk not listen. Duh! The speaker should have known. It should not be a surprise to the speaker.
“The paint was really good, so they stopped making it - go figure, right?”
Again, what is implied here is not something surprising or unexpected; it’s the exact opposite. The speaker is being sarcastic. Because consumers have no appreciation for good products, they all fail, and bad products like Microsoft Windows thrive. “Duh! I should have known that they would stop making it.”
When people are genuinely surprised and puzzled about something, and they want someone to go figure it out. I generally hear people say, “figure that one out.” I find this very different from “go figure”. The latter has a sense of irony or sarcasm that the former does not have. It almost means the opposite. That is, “forget it, don’t even bother trying to figure it out because it’s just my luck,” or “don’t bother figuring it out because people are just stupid.”
Is it really correct to say such a thing as, “We are waiting on your mother,” when referring to the anticipation of the arrival of someone’s mother? It would seem to me that it would be more appropriate, if not more comfortable (at least for the lady), to “wait for your mother.”
One can wait on the corner, and one can wait on a table (if that is his profession), but does one really want to wait on his dinner?
It seems to me that the preposition “from” has been replaced by “on” when used in conjunction with the word “wait.”
It makes me cringe! Lately, I’ve heard it so often, I must look like a victim of St. Vitus Dance!
Does this
“The flu is going around. In order to keep from catching it, you should gargle and wash your hands regularly”
Make sense? I’ve never heard. “In order to keep from catching it.” used in a sentence before.
Latest Comments
“all but” - I hate that expression!
- Syd Batt
- August 31, 2025, 6:30pm
"Of the many battles fought, all but one were all but won."
Left or right single quote?
- JDawg
- August 29, 2025, 2:35pm
This question lives at the intersection of typography, style guides, and history of print practice. Let’s break it down:
1. The Two Marks in Play
‘ (U+2018 LEFT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK, also called “curly open single quote”)
’ (U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK, also used as the typographic apostrophe)
When abbreviating a year (e.g., ’25 for 2025), what you really want typographically is an apostrophe (the same glyph as the closing single quotation mark).
2. What Style Guides Say
Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS): Explicitly advises using the apostrophe (’) for omitted digits in years, e.g., the class of ’89. It warns against the frequent mistake of using the opening single quote (‘).
Associated Press (AP) Stylebook: Same — the apostrophe/closing single quote should precede the two digits.
Modern Language Association (MLA): Uses the apostrophe for omitted numbers, consistent with Chicago.
American Psychological Association (APA): Doesn’t deal with this as directly, but its general typography rules align with Chicago and MLA — apostrophe, not open quote.
So the consensus in major academic and publishing authorities is ’ (closing single quotation mark / apostrophe).
3. Who Uses the Wrong Mark?
The mistaken use of ‘ (open single quotation mark) tends to come from:
Word processors or typesetting defaults where "smart quotes" automatically insert an opening single quote if the character follows a space.
Non-typographic sources such as blogs, social media, or informal writing guides, where people don’t distinguish between straight apostrophes (') and curly quotes.
Some British publishing traditions (especially mid-20th century) occasionally show “abbreviated years” starting with an opening single quote, but this is now generally considered a mis-set or outdated practice.
4. Why the Apostrophe (’) Is Correct
The logic is that you are omitting characters (the first two digits of the year).
An apostrophe is the established mark for omission (e.g., don’t for do not, rock ’n’ roll for and).
Therefore, ’25 is correct, not ‘25.
5. Historical Background
In early typewritten documents (using straight quotes '), there was no distinction between opening and closing single quotes or apostrophe — it was just a vertical stroke.
With the rise of professional typesetting and later “smart quotes,” computers began trying to guess whether a mark should curl left (‘) or right (’). That’s why many people ended up with ‘89 when they typed a straight quote before a space and two digits.
Professional style guides stepped in to clarify: it should always be the apostrophe (’).
Left or right single quote?
- JDawg
- August 29, 2025, 2:34pm
This question lives at the intersection of typography, style guides, and history of print practice. Let’s break it down:
1. The Two Marks in Play
‘ (U+2018 LEFT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK, also called “curly open single quote”)
’ (U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK, also used as the typographic apostrophe)
When abbreviating a year (e.g., ’25 for 2025), what you really want typographically is an apostrophe (the same glyph as the closing single quotation mark).
2. What Style Guides Say
Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS): Explicitly advises using the apostrophe (’) for omitted digits in years, e.g., the class of ’89. It warns against the frequent mistake of using the opening single quote (‘).
Associated Press (AP) Stylebook: Same — the apostrophe/closing single quote should precede the two digits.
Modern Language Association (MLA): Uses the apostrophe for omitted numbers, consistent with Chicago.
American Psychological Association (APA): Doesn’t deal with this as directly, but its general typography rules align with Chicago and MLA — apostrophe, not open quote.
So the consensus in major academic and publishing authorities is ’ (closing single quotation mark / apostrophe).
3. Who Uses the Wrong Mark?
The mistaken use of ‘ (open single quotation mark) tends to come from:
Word processors or typesetting defaults where "smart quotes" automatically insert an opening single quote if the character follows a space.
Non-typographic sources such as blogs, social media, or informal writing guides, where people don’t distinguish between straight apostrophes (') and curly quotes.
Some British publishing traditions (especially mid-20th century) occasionally show “abbreviated years” starting with an opening single quote, but this is now generally considered a mis-set or outdated practice.
4. Why the Apostrophe (’) Is Correct
The logic is that you are omitting characters (the first two digits of the year).
An apostrophe is the established mark for omission (e.g., don’t for do not, rock ’n’ roll for and).
Therefore, ’25 is correct, not ‘25.
5. Historical Background
In early typewritten documents (using straight quotes '), there was no distinction between opening and closing single quotes or apostrophe — it was just a vertical stroke.
With the rise of professional typesetting and later “smart quotes,” computers began trying to guess whether a mark should curl left (‘) or right (’). That’s why many people ended up with ‘89 when they typed a straight quote before a space and two digits.
Professional style guides stepped in to clarify: it should always be the apostrophe (’).
“my” vs. “mine” in multiple owner possessive
- Movoverseas
- August 29, 2025, 1:42pm
Really helpful explanation! I’ve often hesitated between “mine and Gregg’s” and “my and Gregg’s.” Your breakdown makes it clear that “my and Gregg’s child” is grammatically correct and more natural. Thanks for clearing that up!
mobile phone repair shop
“my” vs. “mine” in multiple owner possessive
- Movoverseas
- August 29, 2025, 12:07pm
Really helpful explanation! I’ve often hesitated between “mine and Gregg’s” vs. “my and Gregg’s.” Your breakdown makes it clear that “my and Gregg’s child” is the grammatically correct and most natural-sounding option. Thanks for clearing that up!
“my” vs. “mine” in multiple owner possessive
- Movoverseas
- August 29, 2025, 10:33am
Really helpful explanation! I’ve often hesitated between “mine and Gregg’s” vs. “my and Gregg’s.” Your breakdown makes it clear that “my and Gregg’s child” is the grammatically correct and most natural-sounding option. Thanks for clearing that up!
visa consultants in hyderabad
"badly miscalculated" — double negatives?
- GrammarExplorer123
- August 23, 2025, 12:22pm
“Badly miscalculated” sounds weird at first, I get it! It’s not really a double negative, just style. If you want super clear, “severely miscalculated” works. Also, this guide on research proposals https://samedaypapers.com/research-proposal/ gave me some neat tips on phrasing tricky sentences without confusing anyone. Totally useful for writing sharper stuff.
“my” vs. “mine” in multiple owner possessive
- azuretraining
- August 22, 2025, 7:24am
"This post was very informative and straight to the point. I’ll definitely be applying some of these tips."
Azure Data Engineer Training In Hyderabad
“my” vs. “mine” in multiple owner possessive
- azuretraining
- August 21, 2025, 1:56pm
"Your blog is quickly becoming one of my favorites. Every post offers real value, and this one is no exception."Azure Data Engineer Training In Hyderabad
Titles in quotes
EssayShark has been a reliable resource whenever I’ve felt overwhelmed with assignments. I can post my task, pick a writer that fits my budget, and communicate directly to make sure everything is clear. The work always comes back on time, original, and well-written. It’s a service I trust and recommend to other students.