Archive for the ‘pronoun’ Category

Apostrophe epidemic continues with YOU’RE for YOUR.

Tuesday, 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.

Ostrich farm doesn’t have IT’S head in the sand!

Monday, June 6th, 2011

The Birmingham News has a Sunday column titled "Outside Looking In: What They're Saying About Us." I was quite surprised to discover, when reading this column last Sunday, that Michael Hastings (Hastings Ostrich Farms in Australia) thinks everyone in Alabama wears boots. He does sell his ostrich leather boots in Alabama, but I believe his opinion is slightly exaggerated.  Perhaps he has Alabama confused with Texas?

Anyway, Greg Richter put this sentence in the column and gave me the opportunity to remind readers once again about the difference between ITS (possessive, as in belonging to an ostrich farm) and IT'S (contraction of IT + IS, as in IT'S an exaggeration to say that everyone in Alabama wears boots.)

Ostrich leather is the second most durable, behind kangaroo, they say down under, and Hastings Ostrich Farms doesn't have it's head in the sand over the opportunities that entails.

This sentence needs the possessive ITS (without the apostrophe) to show that the HEAD belongs to the HASTINGS OSTRICH FARMS. The sentence should read this way:

Ostrich leather is the second most durable, behind kangaroo, they say down under, and Hastings Ostrich Farms doesn't have its head in the sand over the opportunities that entails.

Pronoun Carelessness: Which of two women actually appeared in “Attack of the 50 Foot Woman”?

Friday, May 6th, 2011

The latest Hollywood death headline tells of a 1950s era Playboy playmate who appeared in several cult movies back in the 1950s. Her name was Yvette Vickers. An Associated Press article by Greg Risling (and quoted in The Birmingham News) contains an interview with one of Vickers' neighbors. The article uses the pronoun SHE in a confusing way. Here is the paragraph:

" There is a feeling of safety on this street," said author Terri Cheney, who has lived there since 1994. She was born Yvette Vedder on Aug. 26, 1928, in Kansas City, Mo. She took up acting and, in the 1950s, appeared in 'Attack of the 50 Foot Woman' and other cult films." 

 

Whoops! A pronoun takes the place of a noun, and the noun it replaces should not be far away. I'm sure the author Terri Cheney, a bestselling author and former entertainment attorney, would be surprised to find someone describing her as a cult film actress! It is the woman who died–Yvette Vickers–who was born Yvette Vedder in Kansas City, and it is Yvette Vickers who appeared in cult films in the 1950s. However, her name (which should be the antecedent noun for SHE) does not appear anywhere in this paragraph, which should read something like this:

"There is a feeling of safety on this street," said author Terri Cheney, who has lived there since 1994. Cheney's neighbor, Yvette Vickers, whose body was found this week, was born Yvette Vedder on Aug. 26, 1928, in Kansas City, Mo. She took up acting and, in the 1950s, appeared in 'Attack of the 50 Foot Woman' and other cult films."

Whenever you use a pronoun (SHE, HER, HE, HIM, for example), make sure its noun/antecedent is close by enough that the pronoun reference makes sense. Meanwhile, I'm wondering where the idea for a 50 foot woman came from–a wimpy man's nightmare, perhaps? SHE must have been quite a sight.

 

 

Does the FDA clean produce on their website??

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

Here is the second Grammar Glitch I promised yesterday.  It has to do with placing prepositional phrases in the proper order to keep meaning clear.  Here is the sentence:

The Federal Drug (sic) Administration has guidelines for properly cleaning produce on their website.

Whoops! The prepositional phrase ON THEIR WEBSITE should be placed next to GUIDELINES.  Otherwise, it sounds as if the FDA has gone into the business of cleaning produce on their website.

A second comment: The FDA is one group, so I would choose the possessive ITS instead of THEIR to refer to the website.

As I pointed out yesterday, FDA stands for FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, not Federal Drug Administration.  An important part of proofreading is verifying sources and proper names.

I would rewrite the sentence this way:

The Food and Drug Administration has guidelines on its website for properly cleaning produce .

Speaking of proofreading, stay tuned for tomorrow's post when I will poke fun at myself for sending an email too early in the morning and committing the grave error of not proofreading properly. I will also post a reminder of the difference between COMPLIMENT and COMPLEMENT.