Answers to Questions About Usage

IMG: Source

Many writers — native English speakers and nonnative speakers alike — are confounded by uncertainty or confusion about usage, the complicated issue of what, exactly, a given word means regardless of its practical or official definition. 

1. One of the words I hear all the time, which I believe is improperly used, is hopefully, as in “Hopefully, we’ll be successful.” I’d love to hear your thoughts about using this word — hopefully, you’ll agree with me.

For better or worse, in the usage you abhor, hopefully is firmly established, and employment in its original sense (“in a hopeful manner,” as in “I waited hopefully for her response”) has all but disappeared. The only thing one can do to curtail its use is avoid using it oneself, but this is a case in which the people have spoken: The new sense will prevail.

2. For the past few years, I’ve been noticing the use of “only ever,” as in “I only ever stay on the weekends.” Isn’t ever unnecessary and perhaps incorrect?

Yes, ever is an extraneous intensifier. It’s not incorrect, but it should be avoided in formal writing.

3. May “Thank you for correcting me” sound ironic in Modern English? I once used it and got negative feedback. And I think it has pejorative connotation in English, though in my mother tongue it’s just a way to express gratitude or thanks.

Yes, “Thank you for correcting me” looks perfectly neutral, but it’s not: In English, the notion of correcting someone has a negative connotation, like being criticized or scolded, and someone who receives that comment from you may assume that you’re resentful for the assistance.

Depending on the situation, it would be better to say or write, “Thank you for providing me with the correct information” (less concise, but neutral in tone) or “Thank you for clarifying that for me.” In American English, at least, an informal, friendly way to acknowledge correction is “Thanks for setting me straight.”

7 Cases for Inserting or Omitting Commas

IMG: Source

Here are discussions of seven types of situations in which the presence or absence of a comma depends on various factors.

1. Word Function

Whether a comma follows a word sometimes depends on the function of the word. For example, when now is employed at the head of a sentence to refer to the present time, there’s no reason to separate it from the rest of the statement: “Now you know.”

But when now serves as an interjection to mark a transition or attract someone’s attention, it should be set off: “Now, have you had dinner?” (That same series of words could be used in a temporal sense, though: “Now have you had dinner?” suggests that the writer is impatient with the person the question is directed to.)

2. Before Because

A sentence such as “I didn’t want to go because I hadn’t enjoyed myself last time” implies that the writer is explaining that the lack of enjoyment isn’t a factor in reluctance to attend an event; the reason for the reluctance will presumably follow.

But if the meaning is opposite — if the lack of enjoyment is the reason for the reluctance to attend — a comma should precede because to signal that what follows the comma is a dependent clause: “I didn’t want to go, because I hadn’t enjoyed myself last time” Alternatively, the dependent clause can begin the sentence: “Because I hadn’t enjoyed myself last time, I didn’t want to go.”

3. Apposition

An appositive is a word or phrase equivalent in meaning to an adjacent word or phrase, as in “She wrote to her brother, John”; “her brother” and “John” mean the same thing, so they are appositives, and the comma is necessary to set it off. However, if the woman has more than one brother, write “She wrote to her brother John.”

Similarly, in “I met the writer, Jane Doe,” the comma is correct only if the writer has been alluded to before without mention of her name. Otherwise, the comma between the appositives suggests that only one writer exists. (And that puts me out of a job.) Even if writer is modified, the meaning differs: “I met the mystery writer, Jane Doe” suggests a previous reference to two or more writers, only one of whom writes mysteries, whereas “I met the mystery writer Jane Doe” simply specifies the genre in which Jane Doe writes.

4. Relative Clauses

Commas may or may not be necessary, depending on whether each statement in an otherwise identical pair of sentences uses the word that or which: In “The house that Jack built is falling apart,” the phrase “that Jack built” is essential to the sentence, which specifies a particular house. In “The house, which Jack built, is falling apart,” the emphasis is on what is happening to the house, and the identity of the builder is a parenthetical, so the optional information should be bracketed by commas.

“The house which Jack built is falling apart,” without commas, is also correct; it is identical in meaning to “The house that Jack built is falling apart.” However, the convention in American English is to avoid using which in this sense to prevent confusion with the meaning of the sentence with the parenthetical phrase.

5. Short Introductory Phrases

Many people choose to omit a comma after introductory phrases of just a few words, as in “During the summer I like to travel.” However, such omission is arbitrary when such sentences are compared to those with longer introductory phrases — and wrong in the case of transitional tags like finally, furthermore, and unfortunately — and for the sake of consistency, a comma should follow any introductory word or phrase.

6. Short Independent Clauses

In brief sentences such as “I will sort and you can staple” that consist of two independent clauses (complete thoughts that could stand on their own as distinct sentences), writers often choose to omit the otherwise obligatory comma before the conjunction.

But just as in the case of short introductory phrases, there is the problem of where to draw the line. Does one establish a rule about how many words each clause must contain to dictate whether a comma is employed, or does one judge each sentence on its own? Let simplicity be your guide: Always include a comma.

7. Coordinate and Noncoordinate Adjectives 

When two or more adjectives sequentially modify a noun, depending on their relationship, they may or may not be separated by commas. To test whether to insert or omit commas, replace them with and. For example, “She was wearing a bright, cheerful expression” can also be written “She was wearing a bright and cheerful expression.” (The adjectives can be reversed in either case, too.)

However, “She was wearing a dark green blouse” cannot be rendered “She was wearing a dark and green blouse,” because dark and green describe the blouse in combination, whereas bright and cheerful separately describe the expression. Also, in this case, the adjectives cannot be reversed: “She was wearing a green dark blouse” is illogical because dark modifies green, not blouse. Therefore, no comma should separate the two terms.

10 Types of Transitions

IMG: Source

Writing is simply a matter of expressing ideas, but as we all know, it’s not so simple after all. One challenge is to coherently connect those ideas. This post lists ten categories of words and phrases one can employ to signal a transition, with several examples for each type.

These words and phrases can be used within a sentence as well as at the beginning. Note, too, that many can apply to more than one category. (These groupings are arbitrary, created for the sake of presentation; transitional terms can be organized in various ways.)

1. Addition
“Also, I have to stop at the store on the way home.”

“Besides, it would give me great satisfaction to help you.”

“First, I’d like to thank you for inviting me to speak tonight.”

2. Comparison
“In the same way, the author foreshadows a conflict between two minor characters.”

“Likewise, the sequel was very successful.”

“Similarly, we observed no differences in response rate.”

3. Concession
“Granted, you did not ask ahead of time.”

“Naturally, the final decision is up to her.”

“Of course, he will want to examine the documents himself.”

4. Contrast
“At the same time, what she said has some truth to it.”

“However, I don’t see what that has to do with anything.”

“Otherwise, how can they expect us to comply?”

5. Consequence
“Accordingly, I have consulted with him for a second opinion.”

“As a result, I’m not sure what to do.”

“For this reason, we have decided to halt the project.”

6. Emphasis
“Above all, we must exercise discretion.”

“Certainly, he’ll find out for himself in time.”

“In fact, they’re on their way right now.”

7. Example
“For example, he could have asked for advice first.”

“In particular, I draw your attention to the stain on the carpet.”

“Namely, consider the consequences of your decision.”

8. Sequence
“Earlier, you had mentioned a report.”

“Eventually, we’ll see some improvement.”

“Meanwhile, I’ve been waiting for you.”

9. Space
“Below, you’ll find instructions for assembling the shelf.”

“In the distance, he could see the approaching figure.”

“Off to one side, she noticed a package wrapped in plain paper.”

10. Summary
“In conclusion, I see no reason to delay any longer.”

“In other words, they’re incompetent.”

“Therefore, your decision leaves me no choice.”

Solutions for Wordy Phrasing

IMG: Source

 

Efforts to make your writing more concise are admirable, but although some words and phrases won’t be missed or fewer or shorter words can be substituted, others may serve a useful distinction. Note, in the following examples and annotations, the differences in the suitability of various phrases.

“What the organization aims to do is produce an economically sustainable model.”
When a sentence describes a series of actions, revise to expunge the weakest among them. Start the sentence with the subject by omitting what, then delete do, and the rest falls into place: “The organization aims to produce an economically sustainable model.”

“I appreciate the fact that we can discuss this reasonably.”
A fact does not need to be identified as such. When such self-referential labeling occurs, delete it: “I appreciate that we can discuss this reasonably.”

“Due to the fact that you arrived late, we missed our flight.”
What does “due to the fact that” mean? “Because.” So use because instead: “Because you arrived late, we missed our flight.”

“We arrived early in order to get good seats.”
“In order to” can easily be reduced to to: “We arrived early to get good seats.” However, sometimes — especially in sentences in which the phrase precedes know or a similar verb — including it seems an improvement on the more concise version.

Retaining the phrase in “She reread the essay in order to understand its argument more clearly,” for example, suggests a contemplation that “She reread the essay to understand its argument more clearly” does not, and “She reread the essay so that she understood its argument more clearly” is the same length as, and no more elegant than, the original wording. “So as to” is a similar construction, as in “We studied other cultures so as to appreciate traditional customs that persist in immigrant communities.”

Also, “in order” is best retained before a negative infinitive, as in “I tiptoed across the room in order not to wake her.”

“I left the papers on my desk in order that I would not forget them.”
“In order that” is equivalent to so and can be replaced by that word: “I left the papers on my desk so I would not forget them.” (That may be retained but is optional.)

Terms for Time of the Day

IMG: made-in-china.com

Many terms, practical and poetic, refer to various periods in the day or to related figurative senses. Here is a selection, ranging from regular to rare.

Dawn (from Old English dagian, “to become day”), a word for the beginning of the day, also figuratively describes beginnings in general, especially in the sense of renewal or second chances. Daybreak is a practical synonym.

A poetic variant is aurora, from the Latin name for the Roman goddess of dawn; the adjectival form is auroral. (The word is related to the Latin term auster, meaning “south wind,” from which the name of Australia is derived; the similar name Austria, by contrast, stems from the Germanic cognate of east, though auster and east are related.)

Aurora is usually associated with the aurora borealis and the lesser-known aurora australis, atmospheric phenomena occurring, respectively, in and near the Arctic and Antarctic regions. The name for Easter, derived from the name of a Germanic goddess, is associated with the brightness of dawn and is related to east.

Matutinal (from Matuta, an earlier Roman goddess later identified with Aurora) is an adjective referring to the morning; matins, the canonical term for the morning hours, and matinee, referring to an early performance, are related terms.

Twilight (from an Old English term probably meaning “half-light”) is the dim light of the early morning and late evening, as well as those times of the day, though the term almost invariably refers to the latter period. Figuratively, the word also refers to a vaguely defined intermediate state or a period of decline.

Gloaming (from Old English glom, meaning “twilight” — which, incidentally, is not related to gloom but is akin to glow, from glowan) declined in use in the eighteenth century except in certain dialects but is associated with Scotland and poetry because of its use by Scots poet Robert Burns and others.

Crepuscular (from Latin crepusculum, meaning “twilight, dusk”) is an adjective that refers to the margins of the day, especially in the evening, and might be used, for example, to refer to animal behavior. (Crepuscule and its variant crepuscle are rare noun forms.) Dusk (from Old English dox, and related to dun and dust) is the late evening twilight (and, rarely, the beginning of morning twilight); its adjectival form, dusky, refers to darkness or obscurity.

Terms for the beginning of the day other than dawn include sunrise and sunup, complemented by sunset and sundown; the archaic terms morn and eve survive as poetic alternatives to morning (from the Old English term morgen — the phrase to morgenne is the precursor of tomorrow) and evening (from even, in the sense of “equilibrium”). Other terms for morning include cockcrow, from the customary early-morning call of the rooster, while eventide and evenfall are poetic synonyms for evening.

Various terms derive from noon (ultimately from the Latin term nona hora, meaning “ninth hour,” though the sense shifted to “midday”): These include noontime, the poetic noontide, afternoon, and the rare forenoon.

Diurnal (from the Latin word diurnalis, also the precursor of journal), refers to daytime or daytime activity; the antonym is nocturnal (from the Latin term nocturnus).

3 Cases of Confusion with Introductory Adverbial Phrases

IMG: http://warriorfitness.org/2012/05/16/muscle-confusion-got-ya-confused/

When an adverb or a phrase serving an adverbial function begins a sentence, the writer must take care not to introduce a simple punctuation mistake that erroneously associates that introductory word or phrase with the subject rather than the object. These three examples illustrate the problem and provide solutions.

1. “Eventually, I hope we’ll be able to exploit such opportunities.”
Eventually means “at some point in the future,” and this sentence expresses the writer’s sentiment that at some point in the future, he or she will hope. What the writer means, however, is that he or she hopes that at some point in the future, exploitation may occur. To accurately convey this meaning, “I hope” should either begin the sentence (“I hope that eventually, we’ll be able to exploit such opportunities”) or should be bracketed with a second comma to form a parenthetical (“Eventually, I hope, we’ll be able to exploit such opportunities”).

2. “By the end of the quarter, we are sure that productivity will improve.”
This sentence reads as if the writer were attempting to mention that he or she and others will be certain at the end of the period stated, but if that were true, the sentence should read, “By the end of the quarter, we will be sure that productivity will improve.” More likely, however, the statement has the same problem as the first example.

For the sake of clarity, the sentence should begin with the subject: “We are sure that by the end of the quarter, productivity will improve.” Alternatively, “We are sure,” to remove it from the chronological reference, should be parenthetical: “By the end of the quarter, we are sure, productivity will improve.”

3. “With some additional effort, they are confident that he will be successful.”
Again, the writer is erroneously associating the subject represented by the pronoun with the introductory phrase. The solution, as before, is to start with the subject (“They are confident that with some additional effort, he will be successful”) or to make the phrase containing the pronoun a parenthetical phrase (“With some additional effort, they are confident, he will be successful”).

5 Words That End in the Excrescent “-st”

IMG: www.thebostonschool.com

 

Somewhere along the way, a very small group of English words, through dialectical divergence, acquired spelling and punctuation variants in the form of an odd appendage: the letters -st. Three of these terms are acceptable (but declining in use) in British English but deemed nonstandard in American English, while two others, strangely, have prevailed over earlier forms.

The phonological term for this type of change is excrescence, which although it simply means “outgrowth” is a word with unpleasant associations that should help writers (and speakers) of American English to remember to think twice before using one of the following three words:

1. Amidst: The preposition amid, meaning “among” or “during,” or “with the accompaniment of,” is often written (but rarely said as) amidst, even in American English, but it is considered colloquial and unsuitable for formal writing.

2. Amongst: The excrescent form of the preposition among, in some senses synonymous with amid(st), is perhaps even more frequently employed in informal American English writing (and speaking). However, amongst, like amidst, should be avoided in formal writing.

3. Whilst: Alone among these three words, the conjunction whilst is rarely used in American English, perhaps because it sounds especially affected; many users of British English also favor while. Its relative unpopularity, however, is counterintuitive in that it is relatively easy to pronounce, while amidst and amongst involve some mandibular gymnastics.

Though they have the same ending as amidst, amongst, and whilst, these words ending in the excrescent -st are standard:

4. Against: Anomalously, though against followed a path similar to those of the three words listed above, forming from the alteration of again to againes and then to againest before settling into its current form, the nonstandard variant prevailed. Again, as a preposition, has been relegated to dialect used for comic effect; indeed, in this context, it is often spelled agin to emphasize the drawled pronunciation, as in “I ain’t sayin’ nothin’ agin ya” (translation: “I’m not saying anything against you”).

5. Midst: This variant of the noun middle (from the Middle English term middest, an alteration of middes, which in turn is short for amiddes, meaning “amid”) is correct, though its survival is curious, considering that middle is easier to pronounce. The truncated form mid is acceptable only as a prefix in a hyphenated (mid-Atlantic) or closed (midafternoon) compound.

Does Good Writing Matter?

 

The question in the headline for this post is the heading of an online survey I came across recently. I’ve reproduced the survey questions below and answered them based on my own opinions. Complete the survey yourself, and then compare your responses with mine.

1. Do you judge other people based on their writing?
Yes, and although I know that mitigating factors such as dyslexia and poor education exist, resulting in writing that inaccurately reflects a person’s intelligence or expertise, I naturally trust people more to provide valid, accurate information if they can express themselves well in writing.

2. What bothers you most about how others write?
The response choices are “grammar and punctuation (e.g., subject/verb agreement, misplaced commas),” “word use (e.g., they’re, their, there),” “long, difficult sentences,” “vague purpose,” and “poor logic.” This list, in my opinion, refers to errors in reverse order of significance. Faulty logic is the primary obstacle to effective expression, followed closely by vagueness of purpose. Rambling sentences are, by comparison, merely an annoyance, as are incorrect usage, grammar, and punctuation.

3. Have you seen an example of bad writing in the last week?
Yes — rarely a day goes by that I don’t see poor writing. And that’s not because I actively seek it out for the purposes of these posts; leisure or informative reading is often marred by clumsy prose.

4. Where did you see it?
The choices are “email,” “website,” “newspaper/magazine,” and “other.” My response is, all of the preceding. Isolated errors in print and online publications are endemic and almost impossible to avoid (I make mistakes myself, on occasion), but sustained poor writing is also ubiquitous.

5. Do you apply the same writing standards to social media?
Besides yes or no as response choices, the survey allows for making exceptions for Twitter and Facebook. I don’t use either product — or any social media besides email and this blog — but I do apply the same writing standards to any writing. I write informally when doing so is appropriate, but I never use text-speak or any other shortcuts, in social writing as well as in professional writing, though I forgive them in the off-the-clock writing of others.

6. Do you correct the writer when you see a mistake?
When I taught copyediting, students occasionally expressed their unease at sending emails to me because they were concerned that they would make an error. My gleeful responses to such correspondence were generally along the lines of, “Actually, you made four errors,” followed by details about each. I’ve done the same thing to a few unfortunate Daily Writing Tips readers as well, but I don’t send unsolicited corrections to anyone.

7. Why or why not?
During my editing career, I’ve been privy to many such messages. Often, someone will write something like “You made a mistake in such-and-such an article. Doesn’t anyone check your publication? You should hire me as a proofreader.”

I would never hire such a person, unless the message were charmingly tongue-in-cheek, because people who write those types of notes with a straight face, by doing so, demonstrate their lack of understanding about the editorial process: Despite the best efforts toward rigor and accuracy, even the best writers and editors occasionally make mistakes, and even the most careful production procedure can break down. That person’s presence is unlikely to fundamentally alter the vagaries of human endeavor.

8. What is your personal pet peeve?
I think the error that irks me more than any other is Gratuitous Capitalization of Words.

9. People often report “rules” that are not, in fact, rules. Also, rules do gradually change, and some people insist on rules that some authorities have relaxed. Which of the following rules do you still follow?
The choices are “Never begin a sentence with because,” “Never end a sentence with a preposition,” “Never split an infinitive,” and “The word they must always refer to a plural, never a single person or thing.”

The rule about because must distinguish between two usages: in an incomplete sentence (“Because I want to”), which is appropriate only in informal nonfiction and in dialogue, and in a complete sentence (“Because I want to go there, I’m saving money for a ticket”), which is unexceptionable. 

10. Would you like to add a question to a future version of this survey? If so, what is it? Include the answer options.
My question is, “How do you determine what constitutes good writing?”

My response is that I study writing and editing resources and try to adhere to universal standards; I also choose between alternative precepts on the rare occasions when opinions differ, using my judgment — or, more rarely, I break the rules if doing so seems pertinent (or impertinent, as the case may be). I also observe and strive to emulate the habits of good writers.

5 Cases of “Which”/“That” Confusion

IMG: www.poets.org

Perhaps you are confused by grammatical discussions of restrictive and nonrestrictive — or essential or nonessential — clauses. (I know I can never keep those terms straight.)

Never mind the nomenclature; when you’re editing your own writing, or someone else’s, simply read the phrase that follows a which (or who) or a that and determine whether the phrase that follows is parenthetical (it can be removed with no change of meaning to the sentence) or it is integral to the sentence. Here are five sample sentences followed by explanation of the problem and a revision.

1. “The inventor of the Etch A Sketch toy that generations of children drew on, shook up, and started over, has died in France, the toy’s maker said.”
The use of that to serve as a grammatical bridge between the name of the product and the phrase describing how it was used implies that more than one type of product called the Etch A Sketch exists; the one that children used as described is, according to this sentence construction, one of two or more types.

When that is replaced with which, and which is preceded by a comma, the sentence structure makes clear that the existence of other Etch A Sketch products is not implied: “The inventor of the Etch A Sketch toy, which generations of children have drawn on and shaken up before starting over, has died in France, the toy’s maker said.” (Note, too, that I have altered the wording explaining how the toy is used and have changed the tense to indicate that the product is extant.)

2. “It was a time when tensions were growing between the black and Jewish communities that had previously been aligned in efforts to affect social change.”
The point of this sentence is not what had occurred between certain communities of black and Jewish people, but what the entire black and Jewish communities had experienced. The restrictive force of that must be replaced by the parenthetical purpose of a comma followed by which: “It was a time when tensions were growing between the black and Jewish communities, which had previously been aligned in efforts to affect social change.”

3. “Police are probing allegations of incidents involving the renowned astrophysicist who is paralyzed.”
The phrase “the renowned astrophysicist who is paralyzed” distractingly refers to the concept of astrophysicists who are not paralyzed. However, “who is paralyzed” is merely additional information appended to the factual statement, and should be attached with a comma followed by who (the equivalent of which): “Police are probing allegations of incidents involving the renowned astrophysicist, who is paralyzed.”

4. “The company’s incident-response team can quickly and reliably identify events, which threaten an organization’s security posture.”
Here and in the example below, the problem in the previous sentence is reversed: This statement implies that all events are threatening. Replacing the comma and which with that corrects that impression by restricting the meaning to refer specifically to threatening events: “The company’s incident-response team can quickly and reliably identify events that threaten an organization’s security posture.”

5. “The court ruled this week that a law passed last summer, which gave five top government-office holders immunity from prosecution, was illegal and must be revoked.”
This sentence construction suggests that the summer, rather than the law, granted immunity. Removal of the bracketing commas and replacement of which with that integrates the central point into the framing sentence: “The court ruled this week that a law passed last summer that gave five top government-office holders immunity from prosecution is illegal and must be revoked.”

5 Misplaced Modifiers

 

The syntax of the English language is fairly flexible, but one rigid rule is that a word or phrase that modifies a word or a phrase should be positioned so that its interrelationship with the target component is clear. These five sentences illustrate the importance of this rule.

1. “People watched a television broadcast reporting on North Korea’s nuclear test at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea, on Tuesday.”
The sentence structure suggests that the nuclear test was conducted at a South Korean railway station. Rearrange the phrasing so that the modifying phrase about the location of the observation is adjacent to the description of the observation: “People at a railway station in Seoul, South Korea, watched a television broadcast reporting on North Korea’s nuclear test on Tuesday.”

2. “She adopted the term biracial after hearing it in discussions about being a person of mixed-race origin while an undergrad at Wellesley College.”
This sentence gives the reader the impression that discussions were about temporary ethnic designation — about being a person of mixed-race origin only during one’s college years. But it was the subject’s self-designation, not her ethnicity, that changed during her college years, as this revision indicates: “While she was an undergrad at Wellesley College, she adopted the term biracial after hearing it in discussions about being a person of mixed-race origin.”

3. “According to historical records, he emancipated the slaves he owned in his will.”
The modifying phrase “in his will,” as appended to “the slaves he owned,” implies that the slaves he freed were those located in his will, which implies that other slaves not contained therein were not necessarily freed. To eliminate ambiguity, insert the modifying phrase as a parenthetical following the introductory phrase: “According to historical records, in his will, he emancipated the slaves he owned.”

4. “It’s about a guy whose presidency is going up in flames named George W. Bush.”
This syntax creates the impression that the flames are named George W. Bush. The phrase “named George W. Bush” does modify “guy whose presidency is going up in flames,” but for the sake of clarity, insert the phrase after guy and before the rest of the phrase, which itself modifies guy: “It’s about a guy named George W. Bush whose presidency is going up in flames.”

5. “That cycle can only be corrected when we come to value the vital role of private preserves.”
Incorrect location of only in a sentence is the most common type of misplacement of a modifier. Comprehension of a sentence’s meaning is rarely compromised by this error, but only should be put where it belongs. In this case, it modifies corrected, not can, so it should follow corrected: “That cycle can be corrected only when we come to value the vital role of private preserves.”