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 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 passion. Learn More

Username

Ramart

Member Since

July 15, 2021

Total number of comments

5

Total number of votes received

0

Bio

Latest Comments

Regarding the many commenters who've made the "You wouldn't say sheeps..." argument:

Isn't that a classic case of begging the question (in the actual meaning of that oft-misused phrase, i.e., to assume the truth of the premise of one's argument)?

Who decreed that "Lego" is equivalent to "sheep" and "deer," for example, with regard to the toy name supposedly also being a plural forms not needing to end with "s"? And why does the "LEGO/Lego/Legos" debate attract more fervor than does the constant and potentially dangerous misuse of "media" as a monolithic singular entity?

If Ford declares that, henceforth, its name is also a plural, would I then be wrong to say, "I own two Fords"?

If I had told my grammatically precocious child, "Pick up your Lego," he would have scoffed, "Which one?"

Actress instead of Actor

  • July 15, 2021, 8:48pm

I think use of the genderless version is largely a matter of personal preference (of the female actor), probably to avoid potentially sexist connotations of subordination. If you observe that Meryl Streep or whomever refers to herself as an "actor," then it's probably smart to do likewise.

I once interviewed a female chmn/CEO who objected to my publication's prior use of "chairwoman" as her job title. "I'm chairman...," she averred. Same motivation as for the increasing use of "actor" by female thespians, I think.

trouble to

  • July 15, 2021, 8:32pm

Apples and oranges: Notice how "bother" or "bothered" could be substituted for trouble/troubled in the four examples you've given.

"...having trouble to..." is altogether different, syntactically. Stick with "...having trouble logging in..." or "...am unable to log in..."

My Walmart

  • July 15, 2021, 8:22pm

I vote for "my __" as being grammatically correct; it's colloquially common and universally understood through context. (Nobody thinks you are Walmart Corp., for example.) The complainant is a psuedo-grammarian.

... is what I'm saying!

  • July 15, 2021, 8:09pm

It's a tautology, ergo, it's redundant, superfluous, needlessly verbose. What you're saying is, well, what you're saying, i.e., it goes without saying that what you're saying is what you're saying. I recommend you break this bad habit. I'm just saying...