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




Member Since

December 21, 2011

Total number of comments


Total number of votes received



Latest Comments

@Warsaw Will:
Sometimes 'majority' means all the idiots are on the same side. ;-)


  • January 11, 2012, 7:16am

In Japan, foreigners are labelled as "Gaijin", or "Outside Person". When you have lived there a long time you may be called "Hengaijin", or "Strange Outside Person". The "Strange" part refers to the expectation that most non-Japanese don't stay there long. As the invading peoples of the USA look set to stay there for the foreseeable future I would like to suggest "Strange Americans" as the collective term for long standing citizens of the USA whose ancestry is not linked to "Native Americans". ;-)

Please note the winky! I am not being serious.

Had he breakfast this morning?

  • January 11, 2012, 7:07am

It's fine as an example of pre-WW1 English. Many more Germanic (or should that be germanic ) English constructs all but died out by the 1950s. If you are writing a period drama, the following two are correct.

"Had he breakfast this morning?" - Spoken, rising intonation.
"Has he breakfasted this morning?" - Spoken, rising intonation.

As for me, I say "Had he breakfast this morning?" to stand out from my peers.

I can see how people are trying to figure out the answer by looking at "rules" and "one" in the sentence, but totally missing the fact the important word is "stone". Suddenly the whole problem goes away - "Rules set in stone" refers to a single object - the "stone" in which the "rules are set." There were ten commandments, but only two tablets. In this case there are many rules, but only one stone.
"Is" is the correct answer.

Table of Content vs Table of Contents

  • December 21, 2011, 2:31am

If you are enumerating chapters, it would idiomatically be "Table of Contents." However, if you are attempting to enumerate ideas, it would be "Table of Content."

In other words, both are correct depending on your view of what is a book. To me, "Table of Content" sounds more natural as what is a book if not the sum of its ideas. A book is not the sum of its chapters; that would be to relegate the worth of a book to its size rather than its content.

So, if you judge a book by its size, use "Table of Contents". But, if you judge a book by it ideas and concepts, the use "Table of Content."