January 20th, 2012
Here is a good example of where proofreading could improve a sentence:
Ikea has received eight reports of the buckles opening worldwide, with three reports of injuries.
What was that again? Ikea has (to their credit) voluntarily recalled high chairs sold between 2006 and the beginning of 2010 because of a problem with restraint buckles. However, the sentence above makes it sound as if these buckles OPEN WORLDWIDE. What the reporter means is that, worldwide, there have been eight reports of the buckles opening unexpectedly, but that is not what the sentence says. It should read this way:
Worldwide, Ikea has received eight reports of the buckles opening unexpectedly, with three reports of injuries.
It is important to be sure that a modifier like WORLDWIDE is inserted where it will describe the correct thing.
Tags: adjectives and adverbs, Ikea, sentence structure, The Birmingham News
Posted in adjectives and adverbs, Grammar, wording | 1 Comment »
January 10th, 2012
As part of an email discussion about an upcoming workshop, I received this question yesterday:
Can you let me know what you're daily rate is?
Whoops! As I have "preached" before, YOU'RE is a contraction of the two words YOU and ARE. It can only be used where the words YOU and ARE (subject and verb) would fit in a sentence.
This writer needed the word YOUR, which is a possessive pronoun that describes something (in this case, DAILY RATE) that belongs to YOU. The sentence should read this way:
Can you let me know what your daily rate is?
EASY REMINDER: YOUR and YOU'RE are not interchangeable. They have different meanings and different functions.
Tags: apostrophe, pronoun
Posted in apostrophe, pronoun | 1 Comment »
January 9th, 2012
Here is part of a "Job Wanted" ad that appeared in my local newspaper this week:
Christian lady looking to clean one families home.
Whoops! The epidemic of apostrophe problems continues. This lady only wants to clean ONE HOME. The HOME should belong to ONE FAMILY. The proper way to show that ONE HOME belongs to ONE FAMILY is to add an apostrophe and an S to the end of FAMILY.
Changing the Y to I and adding ES makes the word refer to several FAMILIES, and I am sure the lady did not mean to suggest that this should be one HOME belonging to several FAMILIES. The sentence should read this way:
Christian lady looking to clean one family's home.
Tags: apostrophe
Posted in apostrophe, Grammar, plual forms | 2 Comments »
January 6th, 2012
I have read several news stories recently about Eagle Scout candidate Dane Smith who gathered volunteers to help clear an overgrown section of the new Bristoe Station Battlefield Heritage Park near Washington, D. C. About 90 soldiers from the Tenth Alabama Infantry Regiment camped there and died in an outbreak of disease in the summer of 1861.  
Since the first stories appeared, the park has received new information from families of these soldiers and has added to its documentation.
One sentence in The Birmingham News story about this caught my eye last week because the reporter apparently confused the word ANCESTOR with the word DESCENDANT:
Following a story in The News about the cemetery's rebirth, several ancestors, amateur genealogists and historic preservationists contacted park officials with information.
Whoops! The word ANCESTORS would refer to the previous generation family members who died at Bristoe. It is much more likely that it was their DESCENDANTS who contacted the park officials. Attention to correct vocabulary makes for much better writing. The sentence should read this way:
Following a story in The News about the cemetery's rebirth, several descendants, amateur genealogists and historic preservationists contacted park officials with information.
Congratulations to sixteen-year-old Dane Smith on a creative and important Eagle Scout project.
Tags: The Birmingham News, word usage
Posted in Grammar, word usage | 4 Comments »
January 5th, 2012
There is an amusing sentence in a current Celebrex television commercial. It is part of that scary warning section that warns the listener about all the side effects of the medication. The same sentence appears in the warning section on the company's website:
 Patients taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers.
What is that again? It sounds as if both ASPIRIN and THE ELDERLY are objects of the present participle (ING word) TAKING. That would imply that PATIENTS take both things–ASPIRIN and THE ELDERLY–which, of course, does not make sense. Only the words TAKING ASPIRIN refer to PATIENTS. THE ELDERLY is a separate category.
The way to fix this sentence is to reverse the descriptions so that THE ELDERLY are not lumped with the ASPIRIN! It should be worded this way:
The elderly and patients taking aspirin are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers.
Tags: Celebrex, sentence structure, using ING forms
Posted in Grammar, using ING forms, wording | 3 Comments »
January 3rd, 2012
Today's Grammar Glitch involves a criminal I would have to nominate for the "lowest of the low" award. A counselor on the approved list of providers for the Department of Human Resources in Alabama has been charged with using his position to force women to have sex with him. When DHR referred a woman to him for counseling, he would go to the woman's home and tell her that if she did what he asked, he would give DHR a good report and help her keep her children. He actually threatened these women with losing their children if they didn't comply.
Shame on him, double shame! I commend the young woman in her mid-20s who had the courage to set up spy cameras in her house and reported him to the police.
Now back to Grammar Glitches. The sentence in this news article that bothered me was this one:
The prosecutor, Laura Poston, said ( ) used his position to coerce the women into having sex with him during sessions he held at each woman's homes.
The word EACH is treated as singular. Notice that it is used with WOMAN, not WOMEN. Therefore, HOMES should be HOME to be consistent with the singular pattern. The sentence should read this way:
The prosecutor, Laura Poston, said ( ) used his position to coerce the women into having sex with him during sessions he held at each woman's home.
Speaking of sentences, the judge who heard this case was frustrated by the fact that he had to reduce the charges because state law required proving "forcible" compulsion, and it was not possible to define the threat of losing one's children as "forcible" compulsion against a woman. Personally, most women I know would probably consider that "forcible" compulsion.
Tags: pronoun/antecedent agreement, The Birmingham News
Posted in Grammar, pronouns | No Comments »
January 2nd, 2012
Sports columnist Brent Watson wrote a good column for 280 Living last week. It was all about the anticipated rematch of Alabama and LSU in the upcoming BCS championship game. Unfortunately, Watson's knowledge of correct vocabulary did not match his knowledge about the background of this game. Here are two sentences from his column:
The Tide's only blemish coming, obviously, verses LSU. (This is not a grammatically complete sentence, but it is acceptable in this style and refers clearly to the material in the sentence that comes before it.)
Even if Oklahoma State had not slipped up in Iowa verses the Cylcones, this game still should have been played, in my opinion.
 Whoops! Watson has confused the literary term VERSES, which refers to grouped lines in a poem, with the more combative word VERSUS, which refers to one side being against the other side in a competition. These sentences should read as follows:
The Tide's only blemish coming, obviously, versus LSU.
Even if Oklahoma State had not slipped up in Iowa versus the Cylcones, this game still should have been played, in my opinion.
Here is another sentence from the same column:
The Pac-12 and the Big 12 conferences are the only other conferences that are even close to matching the SEC, and it's undisputable.
Whoops again! UNDISPUTABLE is not a word. The word is INDISPUTABLE. This is a tricky one. It is often difficult to remember when a word begins with UN and when with IN, but if the writer is not sure, a dictionary–online or on desk, should be nearby for checking. This sentence should read as follows:
The Pac-12 and the Big 12 conferences are the only other conferences that are even close to matching the SEC, and it's indisputable.
PERSONAL NOTE: Although I am much more likely to be found yelling "War Eagle" (as for Auburn in last year's BCS game), I will grudgingly murmur "Roll Tide" this year and hope that "other" Alabama team beats LSU. At the moment, though, my true heart is bemoaning the Buckeyes' futile struggle against Florida in the Gator Bowl.
Tags: vocabulary
Posted in Grammar, word usage | 3 Comments »
December 30th, 2011
Yesterday's email contained a response from the customer service department of a national health insurance company. I appreciated the quick and courteous response, but I was appalled at the poor usage and casual slang. Please note that a spell checker would not have caught any of the four errors in the two sentences below:
Please allow a couple days and then send me another email to check the statue.
We apology for the delay and any inconvenient you may have had.
Whoops #1: A COUPLE DAYS is too slang and casual for a professional business response. ONE OR TWO DAYS (or A FEW DAYS) would be a better choice.
Whoops #2: I cannot imagine why this insurance company would want me to check a STATUE. Perhaps if it was Washington Mutual, and George was outside the front door? The word needed in this sentence is STATUS, meaning the current situation with my inquiry, not STATUE.
Whoops #3: APOLOGY is a noun, as in, "We owe you AN APOLOGY." The word needed here is the verb APOLOGIZE to go with the subject WE.
Whoops #4: INCONVENIENT is an adjective and can only be used where it would describe a noun, as in the title of Al Gore's movie, "An INCONVENIENT Truth." (INCONVENIENT describes TRUTH.) In this sentence, a noun (INCONVENIENCE) is needed so that the noun DELAY and the noun INCONVENIENCE are both objects of the preposition FOR.
These two sentences should read as follows:
Please allow one or two days and then send me another email to check the status.
We apologize for the delay and any inconvenience you may have had.
Wish me luck on the STATUS of my inquiry. I sincerely hope the actions of this company are more professional than its words!
Tags: spelling, word usage
Posted in Grammar, spelling, word usage | 7 Comments »
December 28th, 2011
I have not done a blog post on subject/verb agreement in a while. That was a good thing, but a recent article about Jefferson County's "inherited sewer pipe" problems contained a sentence that brought the agreement issue back to the front page of The Birmingham News. Here is the sentence that caught my eye:
 John S. Young, the court-appointed receiver, testified during a bankruptcy hearing last month, that 60 percent of the water flowing through county sewer pipes to the treatment plants come in through broken joints, leaky manhole covers and other flaws.
Whoops! The subject for the verb COME is "60 PERCENT OF THE WATER." This is what I call a "lump sum" subject. We write that 60 percent of the bottles (countable) on the shelf have (plural) gold labels, but we write that 60 percent of the water (not countable) in the lake comes (singular) from Patton Creek.
We don't think of WATER as something that can be counted and made plural. We would not say WATER COME THROUGH BROKEN JOINTS. Therefore, the verb should be COMES.
I agree with the commas before and after THE COURT-APPOINTED RECEIVER because they set off something that renames JOHN S. YOUNG. However, I would not put a comma between MONTH and THAT. A that clause should not be set off from the rest of the sentence.
I would edit the sentence to read this way:
John S. Young, the court-appointed receiver, testified during a bankruptcy hearing last month that 60 percent of the water flowing through county sewer pipes to the treatment plants comes in through broken joints, leaky manhole covers and other flaws.
Let's hope Jefferson County, Alabama, will find the means to solve its longstanding sewer nightmare in the New Year of 2012.
I hope those of my readers who are Christians had a very Merry Christmas, and I hope the holiday season has been enjoyable for everyone. I did not intend to take such a long break from Grammar Glitch Central, but an unexpected and nasty case of strep throat kept me from keeping up as I would have liked. Now, hopefully, things are back to normal!
Tags: agreement, commas, The Birmingham News
Posted in comma, Grammar, Subject/Verb Agreement, THAT and WHICH | 6 Comments »
December 14th, 2011
Today's Grammar Glitch gave me my laugh of the week, but in order for you to laugh, too, I must share a bit of background story. Apparently, a 45-year-old man in northwest Pennsylvania wanted some time off from work, and he knew he could get paid leave for bereavement if someone close to him had died. His solution? Have the local newspaper print an obituary for his mother!
That in itself is bizarre, but now read this sentence, which appeared in the news story about the incident:
Relatives called The Jeffersonian Democrat newspaper in Brookville after the obit appeared to report the woman was actually alive and well.
What? This sentence confounds the confusion by making it sound as if the obituary itself reported that the mother was alive and well. I know journalists do not like introductory phrases, but sometimes (as here) they are necessary. This sentence really needs to begin with AFTER THE OBIT APPEARED. It should read this way:
After the obit appeared, relatives called The Jeffersonian Democrat newspaper in Brookville to report the woman was actually alive and well.
NOTE: Is there a journalist out there who would like to comment on this?
Tags: sentence structure
Posted in Grammar, wording | 6 Comments »
|
